Transcript
Rheta Larson (00:00) I dug into these ones and it did appear that Iowa and Tennessee licenses were tied to the MSL licenses being listed and they just weren’t deleted. So we did have the appropriate coaching with the team. Obviously, these were tied to a different provider. I think it was a different provider with the same name but different middle names. So based off of that like one, we should be marking them as needs attention when there is data mismatch. So that way you all can view it and then take the appropriate action. But in the interim, we did delete those since they’re not true permanent licenses. Okay?
Tara Nash (00:37) Yeah. I think something similar I remember happened for Michelle O’Reilly, where the team also uploaded. It was like a similar case but like wrong middle name and she didn’t have a permanent license in the state. I think I had just deleted in the past but.
Rheta Larson (00:57) Do you know if you all went? I recall vaguely, but I think I recall that you all mentioned, you went back and cleaned that up and deleted those licenses… that were added as MSL. And I think some part of our team did that as well. There might be some strugglers still, but I just want to check to see if there needs to be like a, an audit cleanup or a second review there.
Tara Nash (01:27) I think we cleaned it up. Okay? I don’t I actually didn’t put in Angela, I think tao had. So at least for Michelle, it was affecting Michelle, and then another nurse that is no longer with us, so that’s fine should be terminated. But… I can also take a look at Angela’s account. Okay?
Rheta Larson (01:52) Yeah, we did. I mean, we deleted those ones that you called out. But if there’s any other ones that are tied to her MSL, that’s not a true license. I would just encourage that we delete that. So it doesn’t fall into that cadence… which it doesn’t look like these have different license numbers. So I think we’re fine. Now… any other questions for Angela’s Iowa or Tennessee licenses? Perfect? This one I was looking into for Carrie Wasserman, I saw that the Vermont license was flagged, but then the team immediately corrected it. So I see it’s complete now and it looked like it had been complete for a while. Are… you seeing something different currently,
Tara Nash (02:39) It’s completed now, but when Dylan was working on the credentialing file, it was still showing as flagged even though the Tal flagged it to support. They resolved, it looked good. But then the credentialing file, when Dylan afterwards… you know, logged in to work on, it was still flagging. Okay, it’s done now because we just pushed it through because Tal gave that context but just maybe not sure why it didn’t yeah.
Rheta Larson (03:12) There may have been a delay with the either automation or, and then like someone picking it up to manually validate. I know that support ended up clearing it. Support. I did revisit at least from our conversation last week because I know that this was a talking point for an open support ticket that was actioned… outside the 24 hour mark. And at least for those I just wanted to address that sometimes support will take up to three business days to respond. So in any case, I would say like definitely loop me in for any of the ones that haven’t been moving. So that way I can try and get a resolution to you quicker, but… I’ll check to see where the delay came in here, but I know it is now cleared. So I appreciate, the follow up here on this one.
Rheta Larson (04:04) Was.
Thao Nguyen (04:05) that the license… that we were talking about?
Tara Nash (04:16) Carrie’s credentialing file? Wow. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (04:21) This one was for her, Vermont that I think it was flagged as needed attention or missing some info. And then I know support has cleared it. So it looks like it is completed now and clean. I can go back backtrack and see where the lag?
Thao Nguyen (04:36) It wasn’t a lag though. So I contacted support because in the credential like the credential file, credentialing file was flagged. So I looked at why it was flagged and one was the malpractice, which makes sense because we added a placeholder until we have the actual document, and the other one was Vermont. But when I looked at it, there was, I don’t see anything wrong. Anything was wrong with Vermont. So I messaged support to ask why.
Rheta Larson (05:15) And.
Thao Nguyen (05:16) they cleared it in the profile, but, if you look at the credential file, it’s still flagged because that was like a static file at that time on.
Rheta Larson (05:26) The PSV report. Yeah.
Thao Nguyen (05:30) The committee approved it because we talked about, you know, this being not a true flag, but… it wasn’t a leg, let.
Rheta Larson (05:43) Me hijack really.
Tara Nash (05:47) quickly.
Tara Nash (05:52) And then I’ll go to… watch your men.
Rheta Larson (06:03) Sorry, give me a second. It’s just loading. Usually info will pull like why there was a mismatch. I don’t know if you hovered over the reason for it.
Thao Nguyen (06:14) Yeah. It just said issue. Is it? Okay? It may?
Rheta Larson (06:18) Have been with the automation that’s the only thing I can think of is like the automation, either the name discrepancy or?
Thao Nguyen (06:25) It says it was reviewed by a human though.
Rheta Larson (06:30) At the time that you checked or now?
Thao Nguyen (06:33) On the credentialing file… let me see if you need me to pull up the credentialing file, I can pull it to show you. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (06:43) If you want to share, I’m also trying to pull it up. It’s just moving a bit, slowly… hold it for a moment.
Rheta Larson (06:57) Verification results, source four 926 clean.
Rheta Larson (07:04) And then I see Brianna did that on the ninth. And then it looks like on the ninth, I… got done twice. So on the third automation failed, so something failed, it tried pulling it on the third of April, but something did fail on the automation. So then it looked like the team manually validated it on the sixth as complete. And then it reran on the ninth. Again, I don’t know why it reran through validation.
Thao Nguyen (07:40) I’m trying to see here. Okay, this is what this is the credential file. So there’s in the summary, it’ll tell like which one is clean or an issue. So here is Vermont. I’ll say issue by, you know, whoever the verifier is. And then I would go to licenses to look at why. And there’s pictures of.
Rheta Larson (08:10) Obviously.
Thao Nguyen (08:11) The state board website… but it still says issue… by someone on… the ninth. It doesn’t ever like honestly, every time there’s an issue, it doesn’t ever say why. So every time there’s an issue that I don’t understand. I always message support this being one of the case, I think there was another one Gita, like if I look at the credentialing file, sorry, it’ll say issue is medicare opt out and like it’s just, it’ll say like automated and verified by whoever, but it doesn’t exactly say why. So usually, I just try to look at why things are flagged so we can discuss it at our credentialing committee. But like this one has no reason. It usually has no reason. But this one is truly no reason. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (09:17) I can give that feedback to the team as well because essentially, what I’m looking at is it was marked manually by that individual user and it says at least they need attention. This has been verified and has reports as sanction which I don’t think is the case. So I think they just marked it incorrectly.
Thao Nguyen (09:35) During.
Rheta Larson (09:37) That time and then it tried to go through revalidation, it failed. And so our team manually validated it for a second time… because I don’t see any sanctions or, yeah.
Thao Nguyen (09:49) I don’t see anything. And okay… the last time we had a flag, this was dr Catherine jones on licenses as well at these. This is issue and I’m pretty sure it’s just because her state license expired like they literally expired on three 31 20 26 and that was just a unfortunate date that this was completed on. So it usually doesn’t say like I have to go and look what was that? Connecticut? I.
Rheta Larson (10:28) think typically when we do mark them as needs attention or issue, there should be a note corresponding with it. So one I can give that feedback to the team. But the main reasons as to why it would be marked that way is because there’s an expiration date or there’s a sanction or?
Thao Nguyen (10:44) Something I’m just saying like, it’s not in the credential file, like even if it’s marked as something, it’s not in the credentialing file. So when, I messaged support, I think whenever Brianna was pretty quick at solving it, like maybe within a couple of hours of me messaging. So I wouldn’t say that was the issue. Like I can go to Carrie’s profile and see.
Thao Nguyen (11:17) Verifications. That is, you know, it’s clean here. It’s just like on a static, you know, point in time, it’s still gonna say flagged. Yeah. And there’s no way for me to like really mark it. I mean, we’re gonna, we’ll mark it in our like committee saying, you know, we discussed this. This was flagged, but it’s not an issue. But yeah, like I can see that it was updated, it’s just not in… the file. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (11:50) That makes sense. I can see if because essentially someone has to rerun the validation which you all can do as well. So like on the licenses tab, if you go to, let me show my screen… because this reads to the same cred file and I think it will push it through. Should you clear it if there’s no issue and you determine like, hey, there is no issue here. Thank you. Okay. So I just pulled Vermont. And then if you go to the three buttons here, you can view the verifications of just like reviewing the history and the timestamps of what occurred. So like I see when Brianna cleared it and made sure it was marked appropriately, this was the original automation that tried to come through. It failed. So then we did the manual validation. And then it looked like that’s when it was flagged by that user as needs to report us or has a reports us sanction, which to your case, it did not. So then the team revalidated it. But in this instance, you can go to the verify manually and then push that through again and it should rerun it to the cred file. But I’ll check to the team that way one, they’re not missing this and then how we can prevent that from happening on the cred file. So it’s not like there’s an issue and there really isn’t.
Thao Nguyen (13:14) Brianna’s verification have pushed it to the cred file as well. Then if she was the one doing it.
Rheta Larson (13:21) Should have, but you’re still not seeing that? Is that what you’re saying? No? Okay. Yeah, I can check into that one further because, it should mirror to them. I don’t know if this is just a bug because it was going back and forth so much or the automation that ran, but I’ll take that as a feedback for tech support as well. Okay?
Rheta Larson (13:47) Now that I totally get the kind of workflow here, are there any other questions on this one? I know it’s now clean but I understand the issue. And then I’ll post it to both tech support. And then the cred team.
Thao Nguyen (14:00) Yeah, thank you. I just have a question on your usual process for credentialing. I think I added some notes there. Sorry, I didn’t join the first 15 or so minutes. I was trying to go through and read through, your notes as well. I… get… so I asked the providers if they get an automated message or some kind of notification when the committee approves their credentialing file, and everyone seemed confused and didn’t seem like they get it. So, I’d love an example if you have that because, I get emails. So I don’t know if it’s the same email and… do you happen to have a log of when those notifications were sent to the providers? If you can share that… yep.
Rheta Larson (15:01) Yeah, I was chatting through this one. I don’t have immediate resolutions for you on this piece, but, yes, an automated message is going to the providers once approved, and, it should look similar to yours. It would say credentialing approval notice. Hi, dr, so, and so has been successfully credentialed and approved. I’m working on pulling a example copy for you and then I can shoot it over via email.
Thao Nguyen (15:24) I know.
Rheta Larson (15:24) We have the ability to also turn that off, but it’s not something the providers can do. You would have to ask?
Thao Nguyen (15:30) Oh, okay. That would be great. Yeah… no.
Rheta Larson (15:35) No, no, y’all, want it on, correct?
Thao Nguyen (15:37) Yeah, we want it on. Yeah, like I have, when Carrie was successfully credentialed yesterday, I got an email that just says, hi, Carrie Wasserman, has been successfully credentialed and approved. So, I’m just wondering if like, they get the same, it would be great if they do. Yes. Just the physicians that I asked, they did not know what I was talking about. So, I assumed the answer was no. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (16:05) I’ll give you the examples as far as the log is concerned, I’ll have to dig further into that one. But if you think it’s possible, we can pull the log and then send it to you. I just need some support to pull that on the back end. Do you have like how far back this needs to go? Is there a time range?
Thao Nguyen (16:22) Like just the MDS, dos and NPS? So I think that goes back as far as October to be honest with you because I think that was when our first provider was credentialed.
Thao Nguyen (16:43) And then, do you have a copy… of like the application that the providers fill out in order for them to be credentialed? I know it is pretty much just their profile. So, I don’t have an application and looking at the credentialing file like that has their application in there technically because it has their answers… but I wonder if you have some kind of example of like what is needed before someone can be credentialed, that would be great. Yep.
Rheta Larson (17:21) Yeah, I can log that into the same email response and just.
Thao Nguyen (17:25) get all.
Rheta Larson (17:26) Nice and neat there. So we need the example of the automated message the providers are getting the log. I mean, 23 to current, if possible, and then an example of the credentialing application? Yeah.
Thao Nguyen (17:39) And what? Like what is needed? I guess that’s part of the application, but what are the fields as needed before… PSV can start? I guess. And like what does the PSV mean? Like what do you verify… oh, yeah… intake requirements that’s what I mean? Yeah.
Rheta Larson (18:05) It will be anything that’s in the actual cred file for primary source verification. So like the licenses and PDP, but I can give you that list as well.
Thao Nguyen (18:16) Yes. Yeah, that would be nice.
Rheta Larson (18:20) And then y’all, are going through the credentialing audit where you need these following possibilities. I can also work on getting some of these things that we do have, and we’re able to send over to you. I’ll work with the team to get those sent over. I’m not sure if we have every single one. So I’ll let you know which ones medallion covers, and which ones we don’t.
Thao Nguyen (18:42) yes, that would be great. Would this be sorry that this is like last minute? We also just got this information pretty last minute. How fast would you be able to pull this information? Yeah.
Rheta Larson (19:01) My goal is to try and get it to you early next week, but I think I should be able to get something to you before end of next.
Thao Nguyen (19:08) Week… it’s due next week. So, okay.
Rheta Larson (19:15) Yeah, I’ll work with the cred team to get that squared away before I can try and get it to you before end of Friday. That should be fine. One of our main managers is out of office until next week. So I think someone’s filling in for her. I can work with them directly.
Thao Nguyen (19:31) Okay.
Thao Nguyen (19:35) Or at least the,
Tara Nash (19:36) list of what mudani has and doesn’t have? So we can fill the gaps?
Thao Nguyen (19:43) Yes.
Rheta Larson (19:46) Yeah, I can tag you once I know that information too. Okay? I think I have this clear. Anything else on these talking points for the credential notifications log audit?
Thao Nguyen (20:08) No, I think that’s all… of it. I think we’re also working with Mira for the like… there was a legal agreement that was sent to her.
Thao Nguyen (20:27) Sub delegation agreement. I think so everything else on that list? Yes, that makes sense. So we need… And just really any information on credentialing, like what your, what you guys do, that would be nice. Yeah. And then,
Rheta Larson (20:53) go ahead. So, I was going to say, I think I can provide some of this information to you via email and if there’s still missing gaps or something’s not aligned there, let me know. So that way we can set up an internal call with any of the other team members on the credentialing side if necessary. At least, I don’t know if this is in relation to the legal portion, but we can also set that up for you all. Okay? Thank you.
Thao Nguyen (21:18) Do we talk about the weekly… email from Rheta?
Tara Nash (21:24) Yeah. Rheta’s, going to follow up with us about it. She was checking, she thinks something’s not syncing correctly. So she’s going to follow up, thank.
Thao Nguyen (21:32) You so much. I have another question. This is like random, but like in these weekly emails, I do see like expiration dates, which is what is normally on there.
Thao Nguyen (21:46) But there was one where for March 30 first, it says it expired like two days ago, but it was actually expiring on that day or the next day. I was wondering, how… does that happen? Like do you pull the due dates? Do you have an example?
Rheta Larson (22:08) Of what you’re referencing? Because it could be one of two things. Okay? I was just going to say if it’s a provider task that we’ve created and we’ve asked for information pertaining to like a license file or something. Our team will usually put a due date on it just to like make sure they’re following up on the appropriate cadence? No.
Thao Nguyen (22:29) It shouldn’t be a task. It should be one of those like medallion weekly report here are all these providers who need attention? And.
Rheta Larson (22:38) Then.
Thao Nguyen (22:39) these weekly reports come on Mondays and March 30 first, which was a Tuesday. And then it says it was already expired for some reason. I mean, it’s not a huge issue since it’s just in the report or the email, but it’s just kind of odd. I can find an example if needed.
Rheta Larson (23:00) If you want to forward me the example and then just narrow in because I know that report has a bunch of different tasks associated with it. So, when I hear expire, we don’t have.
Thao Nguyen (23:10) Tasks in those like it just says outstanding tasks. It doesn’t say like due dates on them. Yeah, I’ll find it.
Rheta Larson (23:19) Okay. It was.
Thao Nguyen (23:20) Some time ago.
Rheta Larson (23:23) I’ll make that as a note too, just so that way I can be on the lookout for it.
Rheta Larson (23:33) Great. I think we got through most of everything. I have my running agenda item. The only thing I wanted to flag to you all is the support email for our support team is changing it’s now changing over to help medallion co. So we’re just asking if you are reaching out via email directly to support, please discontinue the use of the support email that will no longer be monitored as of today. But if anything trickles through there, we’ll try and flag it and make sure we get it over to the appropriate folks. But if y’all are using the platform, you should be just fine.
Thao Nguyen (24:07) I can share my screen right now.
Thao Nguyen (24:15) Oh, my God, am I in the right thing? Okay. Yes. Medallion weekly report. Okay. Are you seeing my email?
Rheta Larson (24:25) Yes, this was.
Thao Nguyen (24:27) On March thirtieth, and then if I scroll down to like, yeah, let’s say shalhouz, expired one day ago, which seems weird and it’s only.
Rheta Larson (24:38) For.
Thao Nguyen (24:41) March 30 first, I haven’t seen it in any other time, but anything that was like March 30 first, it would say expired one day ago, even though this was sent on March thirtieth. Yeah.
Rheta Larson (24:55) That’s it. Yeah. Okay. I see it technically had like one day left, but.
Rheta Larson (25:05) Yeah, I can look into that further too, just to explore it. And I’ll take a screenshot. Yeah, I’ll.
Thao Nguyen (25:13) try to take a screenshot because then I want to show that is what’s on RDS as well.
Rheta Larson (25:22) Cool. That is also good feedback. And I can dig into that further. All right. I will try and have a response to, on those credentialing audit needs since it’s due before end of week. I’m going to work on that shortly here and then try and get those sent over to you back end of week.
Thao Nguyen (25:44) Thank you so much. Have a good day. Bye.