Transcript
James Donachie (00:00) I hate teasing. Can you hear me?
James Donachie (00:06) Hey, James. Yes, how are you today? I’m okay. How are you doing? Oh, I am getting through the week. The start of the month is always very busy. Yes, always.
James Donachie (00:26) Looks like we have Samantha joining.
James Donachie (00:34) Everyone is popping in right now.
James Donachie (01:15) Okay. I think we have everyone. Hey, Samantha. How are you?
Samantha Hahn (01:20) I’m good, James. How are you?
James Donachie (01:21) I’m doing well. Hey, Steven. Hey, James.
James Donachie (01:28) Do we want to hop right into it? I saw you guys wrote some items… on the agenda. Is that a good place to start?
Samantha Hahn (01:45) Yeah, I added those and I can get started with those.
Samantha Hahn (01:47) If no one else has anything they want to go over first. Let me, okay. So the first thing I have on here, I don’t know if you’ve looked in our medallion profile lately, but we’ve just recently requested about 150 new credentialing files for our therapy associates. We do have in New York’s mhclps and this is not a provider type or a license type that is listed in medallion. The closest thing in there is at mhca, a mental health counselor associate. Okay? And I think something for some reason, whenever medallion is reviewing the cred files for some of them, not all of them, they’re updating the license type and the provider type from mhca to lmhc, which would be inaccurate because the lmhc is the fully independently licensed clinician. This is, I mean, obviously, I can go back in and update it to mhca, which still isn’t correct because it’s not the correct title for them, but it’s the closest we can get. I think there’s just a perhaps a training issue that medallion… whoever’s working these medallions, these cred files needs additional training on license types, provider types for these, so that they’re not incorrectly updating these to lmhc if I don’t catch, it affects our reporting because it shows as a fully licensed clinician when it’s not. So it’s just creating extra work for me to have to go back in and change it in the cred file? It’s showing the incorrect provider type, which is not ideal either. So, I’m just wondering what the solution here is, can this provider type be added? Can there be some sort of training done? So that this isn’t being updated incorrectly? And it’s not even it’s not every for every provider either. So, I’m not sure if maybe just one specific medallion rep needs training or a couple, but.
James Donachie (04:18) Yeah, that part, we can definitely, I’ll write feedback to the cred director on those cause, that shouldn’t be happening for the getting the LP. I’ll save saying all the other letters, I will, I can put in a request to have that added. I don’t know how quick it will get done. No, right?
Samantha Hahn (04:52) Now, there is a, you can choose limited as one of the, where… is medallion… when you are adding the license, you can select limited, which is oftentimes what medallion… does as well. So that is an option.
James Donachie (05:20) So, do you do mhca and then limited?
Samantha Hahn (05:27) I do when I do it, but if a provider adds it, I can’t guarantee that they do it and all the providers, all these tas are going to be adding their license right now. Got it. Okay. So the limited function does exist.
James Donachie (05:50) But it’s just not in the name like.
Samantha Hahn (05:52) The provider type, right? And I’m not sure if that’s caused. I’m not sure if it being in the actual provider name would decrease the amount or decrease or help the issue or maybe we just need to.
James Donachie (06:16) I’m trying to, I… almost feel like both… are important like almost as like a double catch, right? Like it should be identified like by the check mark. And then also if that is like an actual provider type in the state of New York, I can submit the request to also just have it added. But I feel like I feel like in a perfect world, they would be mhcl mental health counselor, limited permit. And then you would also identify that like, on the actual profile.
Samantha Hahn (06:58) And.
James Donachie (06:59) And that would be the best case. So I can do, I can give the feedback to the credentialing director on the should not be. And I’m on, the page right now and then, the LP, I can submit a request to see if we can get that added. I don’t know how quickly, that they will add it. It’s one of those things that it just depends on what’s going on. It feels like a simple update. But I’m also not an engineer. So like when I say something simple, it ends up being way more complex.
Samantha Hahn (07:39) Okay. Yeah. I appreciate it. I guess thinking about it, it’s like it’s I think that having it as the license type is important because, it’s not even a license. It’s a permit. So, yeah… because under the license, you can update the specification to limited, but I don’t know. Yeah, I, if whatever you can do, if you can get that updated, add that license type, that would be fantastic actually.
James Donachie (08:05) Yeah, I wonder, I’m surprised this hasn’t come up before. Yeah… because there is like a pretty big distinction between permit and licensure, right?
Samantha Hahn (08:21) I think so.
James Donachie (08:22) In the realm, I want to say there is, yeah.
Samantha Hahn (08:26) Because, these clinicians have to have a supervisor on their permit. Like it’s a whole separate. It’s a whole different thing than a license and,
James Donachie (08:34) they probably can’t they don’t bill, right? It got, they, they’re like if you, it goes through the supervisor, right? For anything, right?
Samantha Hahn (08:42) For all the T, for all these tas, yes.
James Donachie (08:45) Got it. Okay. Well, I will… I’ll see, what can be done. I think regardless obviously changing it should not be happening. So that one will be quicker. And then long term, we’ll see about, the updating the provider types. Okay? Thank you.
Samantha Hahn (09:08) My next question here was about proxy verifications in Massachusetts. Let me pull one up here real quick… potentially fine.
Samantha Hahn (09:30) Okay. Let me share this… maybe.
Samantha Hahn (09:41) Screen.
Samantha Hahn (09:48) okay. So, for Massachusetts?
Samantha Hahn (09:58) For the tas and a couple of them, there is a proxy verification here. And the initial email that was sent… was asking specifically about these provider types, lmhc, lmft, psychologist, applied behavior analyst. It was not asking about lcsws or licsws?
Samantha Hahn (10:35) And in the response from the board… says we do that, meaning the education verification for all license types except in this exception that he lists, and I’m wondering if this is a valid proxy verification because the licensed certified social worker and the licensed independent clinical social worker license types were not asked about in the initial email? Is this, is this person saying that, yes, for all the license types you listed, we do the education verification or is he saying for all license types ever in the state we do education verification? And I just don’t think it’s very clear we had a similar issue with New York and that proxy verification was okay, even… though they were only asking about physician assistance in it. But I wanted clarification that this was acceptable since lcsw and licsw are not specifically listed in the initial email, okay?
James Donachie (11:55) Let me, I’m going to reach out to that F a LL y, and then Buckley, right? That’s our provider.
Samantha Hahn (12:06) For that one, there’s also, yeah, this other one in Massachusetts has the same… proxy verification, but just in general, for the proxy verification for Massachusetts, for lcsw and licsw, just… want to make sure what’s being used is acceptable. Yeah.
James Donachie (12:32) Let me, let me double check on that because, I, I’m reading it the same way you are that it could be either or. Okay?
Samantha Hahn (12:48) Perfect. And then my only other thing question was about this other file that I have in ready for Renee Mendoza. Okay. Let’s see for her board certificate here. I don’t can you see the, what? I’m SH, I can’t see, okay for the board certificate, it’s… just missing the source on date. There’s a verified date, but there’s no sourced on date, like when this was actually pulled from the internet. So we have no way of knowing when they got this… all the other.
James Donachie (13:38) And that date is on the other… usually on your other files too or.
Samantha Hahn (13:45) Let me look here. So on a, so it… depends, so, like for the license, like if we look at our license here, it does not have a sourced on date here, but the sourced on date is on the actual PSV document accurate as of April first 20 26. So we know that’s when it was sourced on, but… for this board certificate it lists, it does not list a sourced on date. And the sourced on date is also there’s no date on the document about when it was sourced. Got.
James Donachie (14:29) It. And there’s nothing like down in the small print. So it looks like it’s on there. The medallion doesn’t it’s good. That medallion doesn’t have a… like field and someone didn’t fill it out because that’d be like a manual error, but it seems like there needs to be maybe a field for documents that don’t have the sourced on date, like New Jersey. So.
Samantha Hahn (14:57) There is like if there are times when, if it’s not like on the license, if this, if they don’t pull it with the sourced on date, they manually add the sourced on date down here at the bottom. So it exists, it’s just not done here.
James Donachie (15:14) Interesting. Okay. I’ll find out and I’m going to guess that’s for all certified… counselors that they’re going to just need to have it added so I can find… out what happened here. Okay? And.
Samantha Hahn (15:38) I think that I was looking at it, I was looking at the verification and I thought the verification was.
Samantha Hahn (15:59) So, it’s they show it in this verification. Like if you go to the profile and go to verifications, it shows sourced on in the verification. It just didn’t translate over to the pred file.
James Donachie (16:16) Okay. Interesting. I don’t know how like what someone did to configure it this way? Okay. Well, at least the date has been like stored, but it should be on the packet for you guys, right? Okay. All right. So, we know it’s there. We just don’t know why it’s not where on everything it needs to be. Right? Okay. All right. I will look at that. Okay?
Samantha Hahn (16:49) Perfect. I appreciate that, and that is all I had.
James Donachie (16:58) Season, how’s your stuff? Fine. No issues with the enrollment side. Okay. Well, if there anything comes up, just let me know… will do. Thank you. Yep.
James Donachie (17:24) All right, anyone.
James Donachie (17:30) Anyone else? Nothing nothing for me? Okay. Well, Samantha, yeah, I will, I’ll start tracking these down and, I imagine getting the provider name updated will take a little bit of time, but in the meantime, I’ll notify the teams, and then I’ll also find out about that source on date, cause that I don’t know how that happened. I’m actually kind of curious. So I will do some investigating and we’ll get that corrected. Okay. That sounds great. James. Yep. Thanks, James. Have a good one. Bye bye.