Transcript
Connor Morley (00:00) hey, Connor. Hey.
Connor Morley (00:07) Hey, gijo. Hey, how’s it going? Going good, update on the par analysis. So, I was looking through some of the data and talking with the team. It doesn’t look like we have heard back from any of the payers just yet and why that’s the case. I started to dig in with the team on what’s going on with it. And it looks like one of the reasons they think that there could be an issue and we’re not hearing back from the payers is that we need to start adding the group information to these par requests. So I wanted to confirm that we have the right groups associated with all of these providers. You can ignore the practice location that’s not important. We’ll get all that information on the par analysis. But the group tin right here that’s going to be really important as well as the group npi, and making sure that we have the right group names, the lines of businesses you can ignore. We’re going to find that all out from the payers as well. And then for some of them, it does look, it looks like, oh, we can ignore this because it looks like, yeah, that’ll pull in there’s some like naming… issues… but that’s we can ignore it. That’s just all vlookup kind of stuff. But I want to make sure that we have all of the group information correct here with the… providers that we’re doing the par analysis for. And then for the facilities I was looking here and I don’t think we have the facility information for some of these that were on that payor analysis spreadsheet like parkhurst asc in the facilities that we have, we don’t have a parkhurst at least. Oh, yeah.
Jijo.Mattamana (02:25) I think it’s just the naming that’s the new vision, same day procedure center. It’s the.
Connor Morley (02:32) Okay. So, I think that’s… potentially where we’re getting it wrong, right? So I want to make sure we have the right information for all of these facilities and providers. So you said parkhurst is going to be new vision. Yep. I want to confirm that all of these other ones are correct as well. So, Lynn eye surgery refers to miramar… ivc is inland valley. Sky park, is sky park surgery then del mar and citrus heights.
Jijo.Mattamana (03:14) Citrus heights would be eye surgery center of northern California.
Jijo.Mattamana (03:25) And then del mar, outpatient… surgery center in del mar.
Connor Morley (03:35) Okay.
Connor Morley (03:47) I don’t know if these, so… these are the, so for the facilities, I don’t think we had the right name that we were looking for. So we can reload these and try to, and start these requests over. Okay?
Jijo.Mattamana (04:09) And then for the provider side, you’re getting the group information from what I believe Sheldon has populated. Is that what you’re doing? We’re just matching that up?
Connor Morley (04:18) I’m getting, we’re getting the group information from the provider… practice groups. Whoa, what’s filtered?
Jijo.Mattamana (04:28) Here. Okay.
Jijo.Mattamana (04:44) Got it. And Sheldon, this tab is good to go. Is the data that’s in here?
Sheldon Kennedy (04:50) Yes. Yep.
Jijo.Mattamana (04:53) Okay. So, then that should get you the correct lead info for the providers for the bar analysis.
Connor Morley (05:02) Okay. And then we have the facilities right here… you have the provider practice groups… provider enrollment requests. We can pull in all this information… to look at.
Connor Morley (05:29) And then just to confirm as well, for the per analysis, it’s the top payers that gets you at 1,423 in… par analysis.
Jijo.Mattamana (05:41) Yeah, that sounds right. Okay.
Connor Morley (05:49) Okay. All right. And then once we hear back from them, we just need to make sure that we’ve mapped the correct payer names, and it looks like you guys did go through and updated all of the lines of business for each payer. And… I’m not seeing any different or non standard enrollment process. So we,
Sheldon Kennedy (06:22) we haven’t gotten to that, or at least my team hasn’t gotten to that yet. Okay?
Connor Morley (06:29) So, we, are there, let’s see, were there any on this list that you could potentially make a payer enrollment request for that’s? Not included right now?
Sheldon Kennedy (06:43) No, I think we can do that.
Sheldon Kennedy (06:53) Scroll up just a bit, sorry.
Connor Morley (06:57) One second. Plugging my computer in, okay?
Sheldon Kennedy (07:12) Trustmark, ngp. Okay. And you’re asking if there’s any on here that we can’t do a request for?
Connor Morley (07:21) No. Are there any that you would do a request for that are not on this list? No, no, this list encompasses everything. Yeah. Okay. So for the auto mapping results of what would be in medallion… we have a handful that we do have in terms of what the medallion name would be, hold off on the ones that are blank right now, our payr research team is kind of looking at exactly what those would be and what they would show up in as medallion. But for any ones that have a result in here… once you’ve confirmed the non standard enrollment process, if there is one, if this looks good, we can sign off on these payr mappings and this. So for example, if you wanted to enroll a provider in medicare for California, it would show up as medicare California. This would be the payr name that would show up in medallion that you would select. Does that make sense?
Jijo.Mattamana (08:38) Hey, Connor. Quick question. I just realized that the state, it just has California listed for all of them. I know we operate in more than just California. Should we add in all the states that we operate in under them? I’m not obviously for medicare, I know we operate in all states, right? But I’m not sure like whether in Texas like providence wouldn’t show up in Texas, but it wouldn’t show up in California. I’m just not sure what the best, yeah.
Connor Morley (09:10) If you could add in the additional states as well, it’s a multi click. So for medicare, you can pick Texas as well. And I’ll just rerun the auto mapping.
Jijo.Mattamana (09:29) Okay. And then if, worst case, if we’re not sure if that plan is like across states, can we do what we did? Kind of like the lines in business and just include like,
Connor Morley (09:39) all.
Jijo.Mattamana (09:40) lines or all states? So like anthem, BCBS. I’m not 100 percent sure if all of our clinics offer that or accept that across, you know, Texas and California, but I’d make the assumption that we probably can do, could I just include California, Texas and the?
Connor Morley (09:57) States? Yeah, yeah, yes, you can include that. Okay, this too. But I guess the question is going to be… so for the, if there is a non standard enrollment process that you have with these payers, if you can link that, if you don’t it’s fine. We do have sops for each of these for the payers to go through. If there’s nothing. So we can just follow that kind of standard process.
Connor Morley (10:35) Does that make sense? Yeah.
Sheldon Kennedy (10:38) So, what we’re looking at is column D, anything listed in column D, we will just check off. If we have a, if… there is a non standard enrollment process for that, and if there is, we can upload it in there. We can like do a PDF or a word document, I’m guessing.
Connor Morley (10:56) Yeah. If you have like a link to the doc, if we can put that in column K… so we can share that with our team. And then we can create like a custom operating… procedure for that for you guys. Okay? And that could, if you, if there’s not one, we’re just going to follow our standard enrollment process that we have for the payr. Okay?
Jijo.Mattamana (11:29) Connor, can you send this link again in the chat? Sorry?
Connor Morley (11:35) Yeah, one sec.
Sheldon Kennedy (11:46) And then Connor, while you’re doing that question on, with them running into the issues on the power analysis, could that be because it’s not coming from like an nvision source that’s asking for the analysis. I know I’ve run into that in the past a bit and we had to kind of do something that like allows the payr to know that there’s going to be another party that looks into this stuff, but I don’t know if you guys have ran into that in the past or not.
Connor Morley (12:20) I don’t know… Vanessa, do we need to alert, does nvision need to alert any of the payers that medallion is looking at power analysis… typically?
Vanessa Persha (12:35) Not. Do we have a letterhead or like a logo letterhead we can use? Because typically, if we send like requests via email and we can include the logo on there, they really don’t push back even without it, they don’t but it just looks better if we have the customer logo.
Connor Morley (13:01) Could you send that to us… jijo or Sheldon like some kind of, I don’t know if you have like a letterhead or if I can pull up just the nvision logo?
Jijo.Mattamana (13:17) I should put the Guy approximately.
Jijo.Mattamana (13:25) Yeah, I’ve got something that puts up a good.
Connor Morley (13:41) Yeah. If there’s a particular logo that we can use.
Connor Morley (13:49) That would be helpful.
Connor Morley (13:56) Okay. Next question I had was on the asc housing providers, it looks like this spreadsheet is up to date and completed.
Sheldon Kennedy (14:18) Yeah, I think Maribel took care of that. So it should be pretty good.
Connor Morley (14:22) Okay. Can I load, this data? Yes?
Sheldon Kennedy (14:27) Maribel, do you need us to review or are you good?
Connor Morley (14:32) All good?
Jijo.Mattamana (14:34) Nice. And.
Connor Morley (14:37) Then for these providers… do you want to… connect them to the asc facilities and… show the connection of which providers are credentialed at which facilities?
Connor Morley (15:03) I would like that?
Maribel.Lopez (15:09) I could give you that information too. I could add it on that spreadsheet.
Connor Morley (15:16) Yeah. So what we would need that added in this existing appointments tab, if you could do essentially the provider mpi and email and then add in any start date, the entity name is going to refer to the facility? Okay? And it does, it just has to match essentially what we have in medallion. So, for example, like if you look at the appointment entities tab, this is the list of the entities that we have, which matches to your surgery centers. Okay? And then we can load that linking in.
Sheldon Kennedy (16:02) So, if you just,
Connor Morley (16:03) pull in like the entity name and the type we have listed as just surgery centers, but… that’s all the information that we need just mpi, email start and expiration. Date. Okay. I’ll do that. Okay. Thanks, Maribel, you’re welcome.
Connor Morley (16:34) Nick, can… you remind me we need social security numbers… to load these with the data import with the data import?
Nick Vander Velden (16:51) No, just for doing caqh. So we don’t like that social security number isn’t required to do the import, but it’ll likely be required… down the line. Okay?
Connor Morley (17:08) I think we’re okay with that because these providers are just essentially going to be shell providers. Yeah.
Nick Vander Velden (17:14) Then there’s yeah. Okay. Then there’s no issue there. But, yeah, like if we’re doing like enrollment… requests, they might need to add it in at some point for that provider. Yeah… correct me.
Connor Morley (17:31) If I’m wrong, Sheldon and Maribel, and jijo, but we’re not doing any requests for these providers. We’re just adding them into the system to kind of view the credentialing, correct? No enrollments.
Maribel.Lopez (17:46) Yeah, cool.
Nick Vander Velden (17:50) Yeah. Then we’re good… to get those imported at least. Okay.
Sheldon Kennedy (17:58) Where will they live in the medallion system? Is it going to be somewhere separate? Or will they be like in the group’s.
Connor Morley (18:06) facilities?
Sheldon Kennedy (18:07) Profile?
Maribel.Lopez (18:13) Could we see an example, possibly what that would look like?
Connor Morley (18:19) So, they won’t necessarily be separate right off the bat, we can create a team and associate them with a team.
Sheldon Kennedy (18:33) Yeah. I think we, that… would help. I just want to make sure they’re separate. So we don’t get into any confusion when, if a team member accidentally adds them for enrollment or anything like that, just want to make sure that they’re only being used to house and really that’s it. So if we could set them like somewhere else, I think that’d be helpful.
Connor Morley (19:03) One second, because I want to pull this up really quickly, I want to pull up your system really quickly. So what… we could do there’s no.
Connor Morley (19:20) So, in terms of like setting up teams with the providers, what we can do in the system is if we go to like the members tab there’s… this piece called create teams and we can do that by group or practice. But these asc housing providers don’t have a group or practice associated with them.
Connor Morley (19:48) Otherwise, we’d have to individually add each provider one by one unless Nick, do you know if there’s a way to data import a team or assign a team through the data import, let me look real quick.
Nick Vander Velden (20:09) If the team is already there, we.
Nick Vander Velden (20:21) And list it, let me double check though, make sure nothing changed.
Connor Morley (20:54) So, Sheldon, if we could create a team that says like asc housing provider and associate all those providers with that team… would that work?
Sheldon Kennedy (21:09) I think so as long as where will that show up? So like if I’m looking in the database, are they going to have their own house in there? Or will they be mixed in with the other providers? It’s just someone needs to make sure that they look at like the flag that’s on them, they would be.
Connor Morley (21:26) Mixed in with the other providers, but they would have, if you look at the directory, they would show like the asc housing provider team on that. So I’m just going to add this provider really quickly just to show you what that would look like.
Connor Morley (21:46) So there would be teams right here and then essentially… like… asc housing provider,
Sheldon Kennedy (21:59) I think it works for now. I, Maribel, any thoughts on it? I’m not a huge fan of them being mixed in with everybody else. But if that’s how we’re you know, structured? I kind of get it. I.
Maribel.Lopez (22:10) Don’t really know, I can’t say without going in there and seeing what it’ll look like. I assume it’ll work. I don’t really have any knowledge on medallion. So let’s just do that and see what happens. I.
Sheldon Kennedy (22:26) Guess we can adjust later if we run into anything Connor,
Connor Morley (22:30) Okay.
Connor Morley (22:37) In terms of like changing, I.
Nick Vander Velden (22:40) mean, in terms.
Connor Morley (22:42) of like having your admin staff not being able to view the asc housing providers, what… we could do is create a team based off of.
Connor Morley (23:02) Like envision employee providers and base that off of all the groups that you have. And then all of the admins would be managers of that group. So they would not see if they have team manager access. They would not see any providers in other teams.
Connor Morley (23:30) Does that make sense?
Sheldon Kennedy (23:33) Yes. Okay. I think we roll with it. And then like… if we find ourselves in an issue, we can bring it back to the group and see if we can house it a different way.
Nick Vander Velden (23:49) Yeah. And I would recommend what for like getting the providers into the team, I would recommend what Connor’s doing right now, where we just like create a custom group for this team, right? So then you make that like provider association to the group and.
Connor Morley (24:09) Then they land.
Nick Vander Velden (24:10) In this team?
Connor Morley (24:15) Okay. That works.
Connor Morley (24:25) All right. So we can load that data in to… medallion. And.
Connor Morley (24:43) I think we are all set right now with the asc providers talked about the par analysis. One other piece is the tjc… credentialing… sop for the, or not tjc, I think it’s just the credentialing sop for the facilities. So I have the sop document put… together… just need sign off from you. All that we have everything that we need in terms of primary source verification and the different requirements. So I can send that to… you all for approval.
Sheldon Kennedy (25:51) I’ll take a look at it. Conor, when you send it.
Connor Morley (25:54) Okay. Let me send that.
Amy Walsh (26:07) I have a quick question if you’re wrapping up, Conor? Yep. Go ahead.
Connor Morley (26:12) Chris.
Amy Walsh (26:12) Since we’re getting ready to upload those asc providers. Do you have an update on when we can see the signature for the addendum I sent on Monday.
Kristopher Nelson (26:23) Yeah. So a couple things first off, I think there’s still some items that need to change on there. I know G, Joe is working on that and I’m not the right approver of that. So the ultimate signature authority will not be me on that. It will be, I believe Brian yatabe.
Connor Morley (26:43) So part of it.
Kristopher Nelson (26:45) I believe is… the comprehensive monitoring piece is something we just needed. It was a gap identified and then separate from that was the contracted provider increase that we need to discuss.
Connor Morley (26:59) So those are the two.
Kristopher Nelson (27:00) Open items. I know I got some email that it was like the pricing was expiring or something, but we haven’t really worked it out internally yet on signature and what we’re going to respond back with?
Amy Walsh (27:14) Okay. Got it. So, you’re is it the number?
Kristopher Nelson (27:17) Yeah. I think the quote needs to change first off, and then it will need to be sent to something to someone else once we changed addendum, I guess is what it is.
Connor Morley (27:29) Yes. And when.
Amy Walsh (27:30) you say the quote needs to change, is it the 215 providers or what part of it needs?
Kristopher Nelson (27:36) To change? Yes. So, I think first off the number needs to change.
Kristopher Nelson (27:47) There’s two pieces there. So the total G Joe, correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s 210, not 215. Is that right? Yeah.
Jijo.Mattamana (27:53) It’s 210, not 215. Okay. I.
Amy Walsh (27:57) thought we said 215 on Monday, but I can change that right now. That’s no problem.
Amy Walsh (28:07) Then it needs to go to somebody else for signature, yes.
Kristopher Nelson (28:11) Brian yatabe?
Amy Walsh (28:14) Okay. Can I get Brian’s email?
Kristopher Nelson (28:22) BR, yeah, if you want me to, just, I can put it in the chat.
Connor Morley (28:24) Yeah, that’d be great.
Amy Walsh (28:29) G Joe, should I include you in sending it as?
Jijo.Mattamana (28:32) Well, oh, sure. Yeah, that works. Chris and I are going to, well, I’ll chat with Chris a little bit today and then we’ll shoot you a note on if there’s anything else, but yeah, feel free to send the contract by probably.
Connor Morley (28:43) September bye.
Jijo.Mattamana (28:45) You know, I’ll probably chat with him.
Connor Morley (28:48) Perfect.
Amy Walsh (28:49) Am I okay to send it now or do you want me to wait if you can?
Jijo.Mattamana (28:52) Wait, I think Chris and I will chat and then we’ll shoot you a note hopefully later today, and then we’ll go through that. Okay? Sounds good. Thanks.
Amy Walsh (29:05) All. Sorry to hijack, just wanted to talk through this since it’s timely with the upload about to take place.
Connor Morley (29:13) No problem. Thanks, Amy. Thanks, everybody.
Kristopher Nelson (29:17) Bye bye.
Sheldon Kennedy (29:19) Bye. You guys.