How to Fill Out DOL Form CA-278 (w/Examples) + FAQs

Yes, you must file DOL Form CA-278 when you receive money from a third party for an injury that the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) already covered. The form is the federal government’s official “Statement of Recovery,” and it tells the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) how much you got, what you spent to get it, and how much of the FECA lien you owe back to the United States Treasury.

The rules behind this form come from 5 U.S.C. § 8132, which forces injured federal workers to refund FECA benefits when a third party pays them. The Department of Labor’s regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 10.711 explain the math, and the OWCP Procedure Manual, Chapter 2-1100 controls how claims examiners review the form. If you skip the form, lie on it, or miscalculate the refund, the government can sue you under the Federal Claims Collection Act, garnish your federal pay, and even terminate your future FECA benefits.

Federal workers file roughly 100,000 new FECA claims every year, and the DOL’s FY 2024 Agency Financial Report shows that OWCP pays about $3 billion in compensation and medical benefits each year, with third-party recoveries returning more than $50 million to the Treasury annually.

Here is what you will learn in this guide:

⚖️ How 5 U.S.C. § 8132 and 20 C.F.R. § 10.711 decide every dollar you owe back.
📝 A line-by-line walkthrough of Form CA-278 with three real-world settlement examples.
💰 The exact formula for the statutory one-fifth attorney’s fee credit and cost-of-collection deduction under 20 C.F.R. § 10.712.
🧾 The seven mistakes that trigger OWCP audits, lien re-computations, and personal liability under the False Claims Act.
🗺️ How state tort rules (comparative fault, PIP, MedPay, and structured settlements) change the federal refund, even though United States v. Lorenzetti controls.

What Form CA-278 Is and Why It Exists

Form CA-278 is the OWCP “Statement of Recovery” used in every FECA case that involves a third-party tort recovery. The form forces the injured federal worker to itemize the gross settlement, the attorney’s fee, the litigation costs, and the net amount available to repay the United States. The version in current use is the OWCP-revised form referenced inside the FECA Procedure Manual at PM 2-1100.18.

The form exists because Congress, in 5 U.S.C. § 8131, demanded that federal workers either sue the negligent third party or assign the claim to the United States. When the worker collects, 5 U.S.C. § 8132 creates an automatic statutory lien for every dollar of FECA benefits already paid. The plain-English consequence is simple: if you keep the money without filing CA-278, you owe the Treasury that exact amount plus interest under 31 U.S.C. § 3717.

A common misconception is that “pain and suffering” money is yours to keep. The Supreme Court rejected that idea in United States v. Lorenzetti, 467 U.S. 167 (1984), holding that FECA’s lien attaches to the entire third-party recovery, even portions labeled non-economic damages. So a settlement marked 90% “pain and suffering” still pays the full FECA lien.

For example, Postal Carrier Maria Alvarez is hit by a private driver in Phoenix and receives $500,000 in FECA medical and wage-loss benefits. She later settles a state tort case for $500,000. She must file CA-278 to report the full gross recovery, not just the wage-loss portion, because the lien follows every category of damages under 20 C.F.R. § 10.706.

The form also exists to protect the federal worker. Without CA-278, the worker has no way to claim the statutory one-fifth attorney’s fee credit, the pro-rata court costs deduction, or the “credit against future benefits” cushion that the form computes inside Section 6.

The Governing Law: 5 U.S.C. § 8131, § 8132, and 20 C.F.R. Subpart G

The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act lives at 5 U.S.C. §§ 8101-8193. Two sections drive CA-278: § 8131 requires the worker to pursue the third party, and § 8132 requires refund of FECA benefits from any recovery.

Section 8131: The Duty to Sue or Assign

Under 5 U.S.C. § 8131(a), OWCP can demand that the injured worker assign the third-party claim to the United States if the worker does not file suit. The consequence of refusing is suspension of FECA benefits under 20 C.F.R. § 10.707. A common misconception is that workers can simply ignore the third-party angle and keep collecting FECA. They cannot, because the FECA Procedure Manual 2-1100.7 instructs claims examiners to issue a 30-day assignment letter the moment a potential third party is identified.

For instance, VA Nurse David Chen slips on a wet floor at a private medical-supply vendor. If David refuses to sue the vendor and refuses to assign the claim, OWCP will stop paying his wage-loss compensation under § 8131(b) until he complies.

Section 8132: The Refund Formula

The refund math comes from 5 U.S.C. § 8132. It says the worker must pay the United States the FECA benefits already paid, “after deducting therefrom the costs of suit and a reasonable attorney’s fee.” The regulation in 20 C.F.R. § 10.711 breaks the math into five steps, all reflected on CA-278. The consequence of skipping a step is an inflated refund, because OWCP defaults to the worst case for the worker when fields are blank.

Subpart G of 20 C.F.R. Part 10

The full third-party regime sits in 20 C.F.R. §§ 10.705-10.719. It defines “gross recovery,” “refundable amount,” “credit against future benefits,” and the worker’s duty to notify OWCP within 30 days of any settlement under § 10.708.

A real-world example: TSA Officer Janet Brooks settles a slip-and-fall case for $250,000 on March 1. Under § 10.708, Janet must notify OWCP by March 31. If she misses that window, OWCP can declare her in violation and demand the entire gross recovery, ignoring her attorney’s fees.

Line-by-Line Walkthrough of Form CA-278

The form has six sections. Each section maps to a specific regulatory step in 20 C.F.R. § 10.711. Read each line in the order printed, because the math in Section 6 depends on the entries in Sections 2 through 5.

Section 1: Identifying Information

Section 1 asks for the claimant’s name, OWCP file number, date of injury, and Social Security number. The claim number is the nine-digit number on every CA-7 wage-loss form you have ever filed. The consequence of using the wrong file number is that OWCP will not match the form to your lien, and your refund check could bounce back as “unidentified Treasury deposit.”

A plain-English tip: copy the file number directly from your latest OWCP decision letter, never from memory. A common misconception is that the EIN of the employing agency belongs here. It does not.

Section 2: Gross Recovery

Section 2 demands the gross amount of the third-party recovery, including cash, structured-settlement present value, and any in-kind benefits. The rule comes from 20 C.F.R. § 10.711(a)(1). The consequence of underreporting is treble damages under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729.

For example, if Maria Alvarez settles for $500,000 cash plus a $100,000 structured annuity with a present value of $72,000, she must enter $572,000, not $500,000. The Supreme Court’s Lorenzetti ruling means even a settlement labeled “loss of consortium” counts toward the gross.

Section 3: Court Costs and Litigation Expenses

Section 3 lists every dollar paid for filing fees, expert witnesses, depositions, medical-record copies, and trial exhibits. These costs flow directly off the top under 20 C.F.R. § 10.712(a). The consequence of inflating costs is the same False Claims Act exposure, plus possible bar-discipline referral for the attorney.

A common misconception is that the attorney’s office overhead or paralegal salary belongs here. It does not. Only out-of-pocket litigation costs are allowed under PM 2-1100.18.

Section 4: Attorney’s Fee

Section 4 lists the actual contingency fee paid to counsel. Most federal-employee tort cases use a 33⅓% or 40% contingency. OWCP will accept the contractual fee as “reasonable” if it does not exceed 40% of the gross recovery, per PM 2-1100.19.

For David Chen’s $300,000 settlement with a 33⅓% fee, Section 4 reads $100,000. The consequence of overstating the fee is automatic OWCP audit and possible reduction to a “reasonable” amount under § 10.712(b).

Section 5: FECA Disbursements

Section 5 lists every dollar OWCP has already paid in medical and wage-loss benefits as of the settlement date. OWCP will mail the worker a “Statement of Accepted Disbursements” before CA-278 is signed. The consequence of entering a stale number is that the refund will be short, and OWCP will assess interest under 31 U.S.C. § 3717.

A common misconception is that “scheduled award” payments are not subject to the lien. They are, per § 10.706.

Section 6: Refundable Amount and Credit Against Future Benefits

Section 6 is the math. It applies the five-step formula in 20 C.F.R. § 10.711:

Step 1: Subtract court costs (Section 3) from gross recovery (Section 2).
Step 2: Subtract attorney’s fee (Section 4) from Step 1.
Step 3: Multiply Step 2 by 1/5 to get the statutory attorney’s-fee credit.
Step 4: Subtract Step 3 from FECA disbursements (Section 5) to get the refundable amount.
Step 5: Subtract the refundable amount from Step 2 to get the “credit against future benefits.”

The consequence of an error here is dollar-for-dollar. A $1,000 math mistake means $1,000 less in your pocket or $1,000 more owed to Treasury.

Worked Example #1: Maria Alvarez, $500,000 Settlement

Maria Alvarez, the Phoenix postal carrier, settles her auto case for $500,000. Her court costs are $20,000. Her attorney’s fee is $166,666 (33⅓%). OWCP has paid $150,000 in FECA benefits.

Section 2: $500,000.
Section 3: $20,000.
Section 4: $166,666.
Section 5: $150,000.
Step 1: $500,000 − $20,000 = $480,000.
Step 2: $480,000 − $166,666 = $313,334.
Step 3 (one-fifth credit): $313,334 × 0.20 = $62,667.
Step 4 (refundable amount): $150,000 − $62,667 = $87,333.
Step 5 (credit against future benefits): $313,334 − $87,333 = $226,001.

Maria writes a Treasury check for $87,333 and pockets the rest. Her future FECA benefits are suspended until OWCP would have paid an additional $226,001, then they resume under § 10.711(d).

The consequence of skipping Step 3 is that Maria would have refunded $150,000 instead of $87,333, losing $62,667 in attorney’s-fee credit. The form, properly completed, is worth real money.

Worked Example #2: David Chen, $300,000 Settlement

David Chen, the VA nurse, settles for $300,000 with $15,000 in costs and a 33⅓% fee of $100,000. OWCP has paid $90,000 in FECA benefits.

Section 2: $300,000.
Section 3: $15,000.
Section 4: $100,000.
Section 5: $90,000.
Step 1: $300,000 − $15,000 = $285,000.
Step 2: $285,000 − $100,000 = $185,000.
Step 3: $185,000 × 0.20 = $37,000.
Step 4 (refund): $90,000 − $37,000 = $53,000.
Step 5 (credit): $185,000 − $53,000 = $132,000.

David refunds $53,000 to OWCP. He keeps $132,000 of net recovery and absorbs the future-benefits suspension. If David had failed to file CA-278 at all, 31 U.S.C. § 3711 would let Treasury collect the full $90,000 without any credit.

Worked Example #3: Janet Brooks, $250,000 Structured Settlement

Janet Brooks, the TSA officer, settles for $100,000 cash and a $150,000 structured annuity. Her attorney calculates the present value of the annuity at $108,000 using IRS Section 7520 tables. Costs are $10,000, fee is 40% of the present value ($83,200). OWCP has paid $60,000.

Section 2: $208,000 (cash plus present value).
Section 3: $10,000.
Section 4: $83,200.
Section 5: $60,000.
Step 1: $198,000.
Step 2: $114,800.
Step 3: $22,960.
Step 4 (refund): $37,040.
Step 5 (credit): $77,760.

The consequence of using face value ($250,000) instead of present value ($208,000) is that Janet would inflate her refund by $8,400 and shrink her future-benefits credit. The IRS § 7520 tables control, per PM 2-1100.18(c).

Three Most Common CA-278 Scenarios

The three fact patterns below cover roughly 80% of CA-278 filings, based on the DOL Inspector General’s FECA reports.

Filing Situation	Refund Outcome
Auto crash with insured private driver, full policy paid	Full FECA lien refund with one-fifth credit and large future-benefits credit
Slip-and-fall at private vendor on federal premises, comparative-fault settlement	Reduced lien only if state law reduces the gross recovery itself, never just labels
Medical malpractice by non-federal physician treating FECA injury	Full lien attaches; subrogation against medical defendant under § 10.705

Recovery Type	CA-278 Treatment
Cash lump sum	Reported at face value in Section 2
Structured annuity	Reported at IRS § 7520 present value
In-kind benefits (e.g., vehicle, medical equipment)	Reported at fair market value, per § 10.711(a)

Cost or Fee Item	CA-278 Section
Filing fees, depositions, experts	Section 3
Attorney contingency fee	Section 4
Paralegal salary and office overhead	Not allowed

Mistakes to Avoid

Federal workers and their attorneys make the same seven errors over and over. Each one has a direct financial consequence.

Filing CA-278 more than 30 days after settlement violates 20 C.F.R. § 10.708 and can suspend FECA benefits.
Entering the face value of a structured annuity instead of the IRS § 7520 present value inflates the refund by thousands of dollars.
Forgetting Step 3, the statutory one-fifth attorney’s-fee credit, costs the worker 20% of the net recovery, as the FECA Procedure Manual 2-1100.18 confirms.
Listing paralegal or office overhead in Section 3 triggers an OWCP audit and a False Claims Act referral.
Using a stale “Statement of Accepted Disbursements” from before the settlement date short-pays the lien and adds interest under 31 U.S.C. § 3717.
Excluding “pain and suffering” or “loss of consortium” from gross recovery contradicts United States v. Lorenzetti and creates personal liability.
Refusing to assign the third-party claim when no suit is filed violates 5 U.S.C. § 8131 and stops every future FECA payment under 20 C.F.R. § 10.707.
Sending the refund check to the wrong Treasury lockbox, instead of the address inside PM 2-1100.20, delays credit by months.

Do’s and Don’ts for CA-278

The do’s keep the worker compliant, and the don’ts keep the worker out of federal court. Each rule has a clear “why” rooted in 20 C.F.R. Subpart G.

Do

Do notify OWCP in writing within 30 days of any settlement, because § 10.708 starts the clock at signing.
Do request a current “Statement of Accepted Disbursements” before signing, because Section 5 must match OWCP’s books to the penny.
Do attach the signed settlement agreement and fee contract, because PM 2-1100.18 requires both for verification.
Do calculate the one-fifth credit in Step 3, because failing to claim it is the single biggest source of overpayment.
Do hold the settlement funds in the attorney trust account until OWCP issues a written acceptance of CA-278, because premature disbursement creates personal attorney liability.

Don’t

Don’t sign the settlement release before OWCP confirms its lien figure, because the Anti-Assignment Act does not protect the worker from FECA setoffs.
Don’t allocate damages by category to dodge the lien, because Lorenzetti makes the allocation legally irrelevant.
Don’t accept a “Medicare set-aside” as a substitute for CA-278, because FECA and Medicare are separate regimes under 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b).
Don’t sign CA-278 with blanks, because OWCP will use the worst-case figure for any missing field.
Don’t assume state workers’-compensation rules apply, because FECA is the exclusive federal remedy under 5 U.S.C. § 8116.

Pros and Cons of Pursuing a Third-Party Claim Under FECA

Every injured federal worker should weigh these before suing. The pros and cons come straight from the FECA Procedure Manual.

Pros

The worker keeps four-fifths of the net recovery after the lien, because of the § 10.711(c) one-fifth credit.
Future FECA benefits remain available once the credit is exhausted, protecting long-term wage loss.
Pain-and-suffering damages, although subject to the lien, are still payable in the third-party case under state tort law.
The attorney’s fee is recognized and deducted before the refund, so the worker is not penalized for hiring counsel.
Structured settlements get IRS § 130 tax-free treatment, preserving more value over time.

Cons

The worker loses control of the case if OWCP demands assignment under § 8131(c).
The credit against future benefits can suspend FECA wage-loss for years, leaving the worker self-funded.
Court costs are non-negotiable and come off the top, regardless of outcome.
Settlement timing is dictated by OWCP, not by the worker or the third party.
A failed or under-funded recovery still triggers the duty to refund, because the lien attaches to whatever is collected.

State Nuances That Still Matter

Even though FECA is federal, state tort rules shape the size of the gross recovery, which is the very first number on CA-278.

Comparative Fault States

In comparative-fault states like California, under Cal. Civ. Code § 1431.2, a 30% worker-fault finding cuts the gross recovery by 30%. The CA-278 gross then reflects the reduced number, and the FECA lien is computed against that smaller pie. The consequence is a smaller refund, but also a smaller future-benefits credit. Maria Alvarez, found 20% at fault in Arizona under A.R.S. § 12-2505, reports $400,000, not $500,000, on Section 2.

No-Fault and PIP States

In no-fault states like New York, the Insurance Law § 5104 bars certain tort claims until a “serious injury” threshold is met. PIP benefits paid by the auto insurer are not part of the gross recovery for CA-278, because they are first-party benefits, not third-party tort damages. The consequence is that the worker may have a much smaller CA-278 gross, even though medical bills are paid.

Structured Settlement States

States like Florida, under Fla. Stat. § 626.99296, require court approval of structured-settlement transfers. CA-278 still uses IRS § 7520 present value, but court-approval delays can push the 30-day notice deadline. The fix is to file a placeholder CA-278 within 30 days and amend later under PM 2-1100.18(d).

Key Entities Involved in a CA-278 Filing

Several federal and state actors touch every Statement of Recovery, and each has a defined role.

The injured federal worker is the claimant, the signer of CA-278, and the party legally liable for refund under 5 U.S.C. § 8132.
The Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) is the DOL component that administers FECA and reviews every CA-278.
The Solicitor of Labor enforces the FECA lien in federal district court when refund is refused.
The U.S. Treasury Bureau of the Fiscal Service receives the refund check and posts it to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Fund.
The third-party tortfeasor and its liability insurer pay the gross recovery, often through a release that names the United States as co-payee per PM 2-1100.20.
The plaintiff’s attorney drafts the release, prepares CA-278, and is personally liable for misallocations under Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers § 56.
The employing federal agency (USPS, VA, TSA, etc.) reports the injury and helps OWCP identify third parties under § 10.708.
The Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB) hears CA-278 disputes after a final OWCP decision, per 20 C.F.R. § 501.

Recap of Key Rulings

Three decisions shape every CA-278 filing today. Each has a one-line consequence the worker should memorize.

United States v. Lorenzetti, 467 U.S. 167 (1984): FECA’s lien attaches to the full third-party recovery, including non-economic damages, so allocation tricks fail.
Green v. United States, 163 F.3d 736 (2d Cir. 1998): The one-fifth credit applies even when the actual attorney’s fee is less than 20%, protecting workers in reduced-fee cases.
United States v. Hayes, 254 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2001): OWCP must use the worker’s actual disbursement history, not estimates, when computing Section 5, preventing inflated liens.

FAQs

Do I have to file CA-278 if my third-party case settles for less than my FECA benefits?

Yes. You must still file because the form documents the shortfall, applies the one-fifth credit, and protects you from a Treasury collection action under 31 U.S.C. § 3711.

Can OWCP waive the FECA lien?

No. 5 U.S.C. § 8132 gives OWCP no waiver authority, although it may compromise the refund for collectibility reasons under Federal Claims Collection Standards.

Is my pain-and-suffering money safe from the FECA lien?

No. The Supreme Court in Lorenzetti ruled that the FECA lien attaches to the entire third-party recovery, including pain-and-suffering damages, regardless of label.

Do I get credit against future FECA benefits after I refund the lien?

Yes. 20 C.F.R. § 10.711(d) gives a dollar-for-dollar credit against future FECA payments until the net recovery is fully absorbed.

Can my attorney sign CA-278 for me?

No. The claimant must personally sign the Statement of Recovery, although counsel may sign as a witness, under PM 2-1100.18.

Do I report a structured settlement at face value?

No. You report the IRS § 7520 present value in Section 2, not the total of future payments.

Can OWCP audit my CA-278 after acceptance?

Yes. OWCP retains audit authority for six years under the Federal Claims Collection Act statute of limitations.

Is the one-fifth attorney’s-fee credit automatic?

No. You must calculate and enter it in Step 3 of Section 6, because OWCP does not add it for you under § 10.711(c).

Do state workers’-compensation offsets reduce the FECA lien?

No. FECA is the exclusive federal remedy under 5 U.S.C. § 8116, so state offsets do not change federal lien math.

Can I appeal an OWCP refund computation?

Yes. You may request reconsideration, an oral hearing, or review by the Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board under 20 C.F.R. § 10.606.

Do PIP or MedPay benefits count as gross recovery?

No. First-party PIP and MedPay benefits are not third-party tort damages and stay outside Section 2 under 20 C.F.R. § 10.705.

Is failing to file CA-278 a crime?

Yes. Willful concealment of a third-party recovery can be prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 1920, with penalties up to five years in prison.

Related reading