Transcript
Amy Walsh (00:00) hi, rich.
Rich Weissmark (00:03) Hello? Welcome back to reality.
Amy Walsh (00:06) Thank you. Yes, it’s been a bit of a whirlwind of a first day, but hanging in there.
Rich Weissmark (00:11) Well, I’ll make it easy for you today. I try usually too, but it’s funny. My neighbors are newlyweds and we’re in a honeymoon in Japan for like the last few weeks too.
Amy Walsh (00:22) Oh, my gosh. That’s so funny. That’s amazing. Do you know what parts of Japan they were in?
Rich Weissmark (00:27) They went everywhere like everywhere. Yeah.
Amy Walsh (00:29) That’s kind of like us and.
Rich Weissmark (00:31) They have two Boston terriers, just like.
Amy Walsh (00:34) that. Oh, Naomi, yeah, yeah, Naomi too. Yeah. Oh, that’s awesome. Yeah, I mean, it was absolutely wonderful. I highly recommend it. I know it’s a very far trip, but if you want to take a big trip, very cool place to go.
Rich Weissmark (00:46) It’s on the top of the list. I don’t take long trips enough and I need to, I’m always working but that picture back there is a photograph from Japan. Oh, that’s from Osaka.
Amy Walsh (00:56) Yeah. Yep. We were in that forest, the one in Kyoto anyway, but yeah, it was.
Rich Weissmark (01:01) Really incredible. Is it Kyoto or Osaka? I have to look.
Amy Walsh (01:04) It’s in Kyoto. Osaka is like very close to Kyoto though. So we did a day trip there actually from Kyoto. I bought it.
Rich Weissmark (01:12) I don’t remember all the details, but I bought that picture probably over a long time ago, maybe almost when I got my first management job and had to move into an office, right?
Amy Walsh (01:25) Okay. Nice. And they.
Rich Weissmark (01:27) don’t and I didn’t hang anything on the wall for like a year and they’re like people think you’re going to quit because you have to go to the office. So I bought that picture.
Amy Walsh (01:34) Oh, that’s awesome. Well, you are ahead of the curve of the knowing people, cool photos from Japan because now Japan’s so cool. But I.
Rich Weissmark (01:44) was cool then, but I’m not cool now, so.
Amy Walsh (01:47) No, you were cool then, and before everyone else was cool. So.
Rich Weissmark (01:51) So, I’m glad you’re back and I hope, yeah, not much. Let me tell you well, and you go first. Anything on top of mind for you?
Amy Walsh (02:01) I did put together a deck as I tend to do with our calls. I’m happy to go through it, but we can keep it super informal too. Just wanted to check in with you obviously first to make sure see how things are going.
Rich Weissmark (02:12) Again feedback, we’re making a lot of progress. I’d say now that we’re officially when you were out, we officially wound down implementation with Naomi and Nick and got transitioned to Lindsay. Yeah… there’s still a lot to do and that’s on us because we approached the kickoff very focused and with this kind of time bound effort to term symplr and all that stuff. And so we did that’s all done today is the last day of that contract. They were gracious on the separation as much as somebody can be sure. Oh, good. I would say that Lindsay, well, we haven’t spent enough time with Lindsay yet. So it’s hard for me to give you any feedback there.
Amy Walsh (02:59) That’s fine.
Rich Weissmark (02:59) But I’d say that Naomi set the bar really high. So we’re all ready to be a little bit like of course, accumulated to steady state operations if you will, you know, yes of.
Amy Walsh (03:10) course.
Rich Weissmark (03:12) That’s about it. I’d say we’re focused on just like now that like it’s the product and it’s in place and the data’s all moved over like we’re focused on like dialing in the reporting and reminding people they’re going to have to self service and it’s like more internal stuff that we have to do at this point. Yeah, there’s a handful of things we’re working on with Lindsay, but nothing notable right now. Okay?
Amy Walsh (03:37) Awesome. Yeah, that sounds great. Pretty status quo.
Rich Weissmark (03:41) One more thought before you go through the slides. I just think that’s going to come up when we talk to her this week, we don’t do a lot of hospital privileges and some medical licenses, state medical licenses, and we’ve already done state medical licenses with medallion. So that’s fine because I’m pushing, you know, Kathleen to make more workforce impact. I don’t enjoy saying that, but it’s just the world we’re living in. Unfortunately, yeah, I’m pushing her to kind of like get comfortable with what doing facility privileges looks like with medallion. So if we have to, we know how, and so that’s going to be on the agenda when we talk to Lindsay this week, we have a whole list.
Amy Walsh (04:22) Okay, great. So starting to use our hospital application. Yeah. Okay. Got it.
Rich Weissmark (04:27) Yeah, because my concern is, you know, running this business with one fte in, Kathleen is a little bit tough. Yeah, I have to support her in every way I can to like think about using the tools. Oh, yeah, you know, that’s where I’m heads up, oh,
Amy Walsh (04:43) yeah, no, I appreciate that. I mean that’s really what we’re here for as I know you understand from an industry perspective, so definitely want to help where we can and take more on. I know Naomi had talked to you guys a little bit about adding hospital applications, not adding but using what you’re already contracted for. And I know it was a bit at a standstill just because you wanted to get up and running, which makes total sense. So excited to hear that you want to start to pursue that with us. Definitely something we can help with. And Lindsay can certainly guide a lot of those conversations.
Rich Weissmark (05:13) Sounds good.
Amy Walsh (05:15) Perfect. That was actually on my mind to bring up today. So we are on the same page which is great, but before we get into kind of future looking, I do want to just do a little bit of, you know, I guess back looking not using the right corporate word for that right now. Sorry, my brain is so foggy it’s a.
Rich Weissmark (05:32) retrospective.
Amy Walsh (05:32) I got you. Thank you. My brain is still on vacation mode a little bit.
Rich Weissmark (05:36) Understandable.
Amy Walsh (05:36) Getting there but did just want to talk about consumption so far with your contract spend and just the trend that I’m seeing with your use of like medallion thus far. So this slide kind of shows you what you’re currently contracted for and what you’ve consumed thus far.
Amy Walsh (05:55) I pulled starting from January first up through today’s, date, this is where your consumption is at. So to kind of walk you through this on the purchase quantity that’s the number of service lines or seats that you purchase depending on what product we’re talking about. And the consumed is how many you’ve consumed from what you are contracted for. So with all this being said, and I’ll send this to you for you to review. And we can talk about any questions you have. Now you’re trending at a good pace in that you’re 24 percent through your contract, spend about four months a little over of your contract, equating to 25 percent of your first year of your contract. So I’ll pause there, but do like to have these conversations very proactively with our clients because I’m not sure how much you’re briefed on this during sales. I know you and I have talked a little bit about it. But if you do go over your contract consumption, that can lead to, you know, a true open voice. We’d have to send to you right away. So we do like to be ahead of this as much as possible to avoid any type of overconsumption.
Rich Weissmark (06:56) Yeah. I don’t like true open voices that’s for sure.
Amy Walsh (07:00) Well,
Rich Weissmark (07:00) I think if I’m understanding the first four rows correctly, let’s go with row one that’s not based on a timeframe that’s based on what we forecast. So I think that looks probably good. That means we’re probably pretty close. Same for number two. I think the part that’s tricky with number two, meaning I should say row two is that those pass through fees. Is that what that’s representing this is just the ongoing?
Amy Walsh (07:29) Ongoing ncqa monitoring in the background. So that number, I mean, I’ve seen it very rarely not equate the number of providers you’re contracted for, but typically you want ongoing monitoring turned on for all your providers within medallion. So we’re taking on that work from your providers or other or your admins or your other services you may use. So that’s why that number matches. But yes, that’s separate from pass through fees.
Rich Weissmark (07:53) Yeah. Okay. Caqh, that’s probably right because she’s doing all the work right now to get everyone enabled and that should move up, yes.
Amy Walsh (08:04) And I remember, yeah. And I was going to bring this up to you today too and I can have Lindsay check with Kathleen about this week, but I remember you saying that was on hold to turn on for all of the providers in medallion until your symplr contract was up because I think they were still owning some of that or something if I remember correctly. Yeah, that’s over exactly. So, yeah, that number should go back.
Rich Weissmark (08:23) Up. She’s actively working on it as we speak.
Amy Walsh (08:26) Oh, amazing. Perfect. So I.
Rich Weissmark (08:27) think that’s not a forecast problem. I think it’s just, we had to wait.
Amy Walsh (08:32) Exactly. So that number similar to the other first two I mentioned above should go up to 254 then, but again, I know some providers don’t want other people managing their caqh profiles that can be few and far between, but I know that there could be some back and forth in that she’s working.
Rich Weissmark (08:49) Through it. Okay. Amazing payr at the moment, I mean, that’s a function of how much we hire and how much turnover we have, how much organic hiring we do and how many just like replacements and hiring has been. You know, we’re not doing really de novo. So it just hasn’t I think it’ll catch up but it’s been slow. Yeah, the ones that I’m really so provider or demographic group updates that the 100 bucks per unit kind of shocks me quite honestly.
Amy Walsh (09:20) Yeah. That’s our list price. Okay. So in your original contract, you were not contracted for provider or group demographic updates. You were only contracted for payer enrollments, what we can do.
Amy Walsh (09:33) And you and I can talk about this more is we like to show the list price because we can talk about some type of, you know, discounts… that would mean signing an addendum at that discounted price, but we could have a conversation about that. If you foresee that this number is going to continue to go up and continue to bleed into your overall consumption because right now it’s at a higher rate based on your overall consumption. Yeah.
Rich Weissmark (09:59) I’d say let’s kick the can on it a little bit, but make sure we talk about it in more depth at some point because, yeah.
Amy Walsh (10:05) Absolutely you.
Rich Weissmark (10:06) Know it’s one of the things that well, I want to make sure I understand all the different actions that result in a provider update. But I know that like correspondence updates with payers are a hugely miss or non managed thing at every company I’ve ever worked at and it’s a risk to the business because a letter goes to some random lockbox to some practice you acquired, and then you get sued or some huge fine because you didn’t know about it. I would think that you guys probably could update those payer correspondence addresses pretty effectively if I have to deal with like a budget delta, I may have to just get creative with like risk mitigation, I guess is what I’m saying.
Amy Walsh (10:47) Yeah, yeah. Great question. I can double check on that for you with our team. I don’t know off the top of my head about that field specifically, but to your point, I think that’s something we can help with, but can certainly follow up on that just to make sure that’s something we do within that SKU… okay?
Rich Weissmark (11:06) Again, the state licensing, no concerns. We’re actually happy with how it went. I mean, we had a couple, we just got a couple licenses and it went pretty fast and smooth. So, nice job, madaket.
Amy Walsh (11:16) Yeah, absolutely. Do you anticipate, I know you said hiring is not, you know, you’re not hiring a ton right now, but do you anticipate you’re going to be needing to do a lot more state licensing new applications? Yeah.
Rich Weissmark (11:29) I don’t know. I would say not a lot more. It’s too. It’s hard to forecast. But as we hire younger physicians earlier in the residency and fellowship, we’ll probably be doing more okay?
Amy Walsh (11:40) Sounds good. Similar to the point I made above, you know, right now you’re being charged or not charged, but your consumption is leading 650 of that unit price leading to a higher consumption rate. So if you do feel that there’s going to be way more coming, we could talk about a discount to make sure that you’re not being charged at fullest price for that. Got it. Okay. Awesome. So we’ll keep this conversation going. Just wanted to get it on your radar again. You’re trending at an okay pace now, but do you just want to flag it?
Rich Weissmark (12:09) We don’t look out of whack compared to what you usually say. Okay, good. That’s a good answer.
Amy Walsh (12:13) Definitely not out of whack. I will say, I do anticipate your numbers to go up quickly just based on you’ve been in implementation for four months and you have been doing a lot of active enrollments et cetera. But you guys are a very active client which I appreciate and you’re really using our software at a good pace and using it quite a bit. So I think this is something we will have to continue to talk about but it’s not like you’re already very much over consuming your one spend or anything like that.
Rich Weissmark (12:44) We better use it. I mean, I don’t know, I’m guessing if your other clients aren’t using it fully, then they’re not succeeding in implementation is how I think about that.
Amy Walsh (12:52) Yes, that’s part of it. And then some of it is scoping issues where they thought they were going to be using one service. And aren’t because of internal issues discourse around how they do want to go about things. So kind of, you know, varies I will say, luckily, most of my clients are like you guys, but there are those edge cases where, you know, there’s just some internal discourse going on about how they want to use this.
Rich Weissmark (13:18) I get it. I mean, I guess if there’s one thing I learned from this process that if I were talking to other customers, if their data is not in order, they should think about that before they sign the order form, yes.
Amy Walsh (13:33) Perfect. So just want to show you the slide too. It’s your upcoming consumption. So these are all this to draw the distinction because we’ll continue to talk about this over our partnership. This is consume lines. What your team is, our team has already completed what providers already in medallion being monitored, et cetera. This slide are service lines that are not past what we call our intake phase. So they’re still at the beginning of the overall service phase line. Once we get past intake with the lines that are being requested, then this will be moved to consumption. So usually we like to, you know, estimate about a month from now, all of this will lead into your actual consume lines.
Amy Walsh (14:15) So you’ll be more at that like 28 percent of your overall year one consumption. So again, you’re tracking at a good pace. But it’s something I do like to call out that there is, you know, upcoming consumption coming through on your contract and service lines and.
Rich Weissmark (14:29) Remind me of one other thing if we end up with like a big like budget mess in terms of what we planned for year one, I kind of remember we could almost redistribute anything from year two or most things in terms of what we bought. Like there was discussion during the pre sales process about if you overuse your year one planned credits, you could redistribute. I have to find the email but like isn’t there a way across the duration of the order form to kind of pull things forward if we have to.
Amy Walsh (15:03) So not exactly this and you can forward me whatever you find with sales, so we can get on the same page. But, and I, yeah, just let me know what you can find. But what the sales person may have been discussing because this is the talk track. I’m more accustomed to hearing and understanding is you can spread across SKUs. So let’s say you only use 400 payer enrollments this year. You can then make up that 47 difference with let’s say provider or group demographic updates. So you have some wiggle room between the different SKUs that you’re using to get to your overall contracted price.
Rich Weissmark (15:40) So within the contract performance here, you could move across categories, but you can’t.
Amy Walsh (15:45) move across the year. Exactly. No, that’s correct. Yeah, exactly. Got it. Yep. And yeah, I like to have these conversations super proactively because if we do foresee that you’re going to be going over your year one contract spend, I just like to be super transparent no.
Rich Weissmark (16:00) You take all the heat as part of you for doing that, I get it.
Amy Walsh (16:04) Yeah, no, I appreciate it. But yeah, we can continue to talk about it and et cetera. Again, I think you guys are fine now, but I do want to be on top of it with your contract because I am seeing a potential trend for more use. So just want to be super on top of it. Okay… okay, perfect. So also want to show you some quick stats. I know you and I had a conversation back in early March. I think it was before your board meeting and showed you some quick, you know, stats at that time about how medallion was performing with payer enrollment, but did just want to show you this as well. And I pulled it from that dashboard. I showed you how to look at anyway, but do like to just make it easy for you guys to see. But any quick questions about this for me? No, no, I’m.
Rich Weissmark (16:48) self sufficient, thanks to that session we had, oh good. And I did since in some of these other meetings, we spend way too much time with our board and this isn’t typical board stuff, but I have already showed them some other kind of aggregate like 55 percent reduction in like median days, enrollment request par like compared to what we were seeing with the previous partners. So, yeah, I’m good with this now. Thank.
Amy Walsh (17:14) You. Yeah. Of course. That’s awesome. And, you know, to be transparent, we love to get success stories from our clients. So hearing that you’re seeing a 55 percent reduction, some of your dates is very exciting to me and would be exciting to our marketing team. So if there’s ever a time where you’d want to talk about that more or just any type of dialogue? Yeah.
Rich Weissmark (17:34) Let’s give it a little bit more time, of course. Yeah, absolutely. I’m thinking I met with Derek and I’m trying to remember the product officer.
Amy Walsh (17:41) Leah, probably, yeah, yeah, lovely.
Rich Weissmark (17:43) Conversation, I shared a bunch of things with them. It was, you know, I think what you guys are doing is really important and I think it’s a really screwed up business. So I try to help, I did refer another prospective client and that’s the call and full disclosure. It’s a company I’m an advisor to. So I try to be open about that. And when I say I’m an advisor to them over the next few months and nobody at phynet knows this yet.
Rich Weissmark (18:14) So I’m going to be spending more time with them at that other company. And so me and one of the guys from that team are meeting with Jake this week?
Amy Walsh (18:23) Oh, nice. Awesome. That’s.
Rich Weissmark (18:25) great. Yeah, it’ll be obviously if we end up doing the business with them, I’d love for you to be our partner there.
Amy Walsh (18:32) Oh, thank you. Yeah, I’d love that too.
Rich Weissmark (18:34) It’s more of an early stage business. So it would need, it would be less exciting from a sales perspective, but a potential growth story. So when it’s time to talk after we have that first call with Jake, I’ll you know, we’ll let you know if it goes anywhere. Yeah.
Amy Walsh (18:48) Absolutely. That sounds great. And Jake’s awesome. So you’re in great hands as I know, you know, you’ve already worked with him and yeah, we can hold on the case study. That’s just me getting excited, but do you hear that it’s great. I’ll.
Rich Weissmark (18:59) continue to try to be a friend to the company.
Rich Weissmark (19:00) Like I said, the other giant lead that they were talking to is pediatrics medical group. I don’t know if, you know that anyways, I worked there for almost… I offered to help there, but I mean, it would be enormous. It’s like 4,000 providers. You know, wow. What else? What else is?
Amy Walsh (19:26) On your mind? Yes, let’s see what else I have here. Oh, I wanted to chat with you about cred and delegated cred is that you had mentioned to me back in probably January that you wanted to learn more about this but you had so many other things going on with medallion. So we were holding, do you know much about our cred product line? Do you want to hear about it today? Do you want to wait a little bit longer? We?
Rich Weissmark (19:46) Inspected it pretty extensively during the pre sales process because I, even though there’s a lot of fragmentation in phynet, there’s a couple national payers where I think we’d hit. We, we could meet the requirements for delegated. The truth is we’re just not we have too many other initiatives going on right now, but I sure hope that once like, we continue to get things kind of stable and steady state with having a one person credentialing team backed by medallion. We could revisit delegated credentialing for sure. It’s just not ready yet.
Amy Walsh (20:20) That sounds great. The one piece I will mention. So talking about cred. So I’m sure you know, this, you need about 12 months of history to be able to submit to a payer to get delegated. Do you have a process in place right now where you’ll be able to pull that in 12 months? Because what medallion offers is just a way the cred piece to start to have that on medallion. So then once you do want to get delegated, you start to have that 12 months history to then approach delegated credentialing that’s.
Rich Weissmark (20:50) a good point. We definitely won’t have the history in any healthy or quality state.
Amy Walsh (20:55) That’s why.
Rich Weissmark (20:56) We’re with you guys. So you’re saying I could potentially consider paying that initial fee to start the process of building cred, the history if you will.
Amy Walsh (21:09) So, great question. So the way it would work is you would start to use us for credentialing and cqa standards. So, I think, you know this that we’re an ncqa accredited partner. So we have all the necessary verifications and certifications needed to be considered legitimate for payers to take us into consideration as your cbo. The way it would work is you would start using us for cred. So you would have Kathleen, whoever it is, submit a request with a medallion for a list of your providers to get a credentialing packet created based on your internal policies and procedures. Our team would then create those packets on your behalf. You would have a committee that would vote on them, make sure that they are approved to continue to be able to serve within phynet and all that would be happening with a medallion in a super streamlined process that can go through a more of a demo. This is interesting too on a different call. And then from there, you’re gathering the necessary, you know, what’s… the word I’m looking for necessary, I guess data and traction and all the packets that would be needed for you. Then to take that to your payer, and then apply for delegated cred because you don’t have a street, you know, a process where you’re credentialing your providers. They’re not even going to consider delegating you.
Rich Weissmark (22:35) No, I understand we would need to set up the committee and the.
Amy Walsh (22:37) exactly I’ve.
Rich Weissmark (22:38) worked at. This is the first organization I’ve worked at that couldn’t do delegated credentialing. So it’s very, let me think about it. I just don’t think we’re prepared to take on more work in the current that’s the problem. I mean, and I don’t know how much it would burden Kathleen and our team, but I see your point is well taken that we really do need to start soon if we want to get there, yeah.
Amy Walsh (23:03) Absolutely. And I can send you this after this is just a quick look into what your team will do and what we do. Honestly. I know I hear your point on the work. Of course, the initial implementation of this would be some work for Kathleen and the team, but then we would be owning the actual process of getting all the providers appropriately credentialed. So this is all listed here for you and I can send this for you as well.
Rich Weissmark (23:27) What’s the initial investment to get this started? Because I would like to at least kind of share it with the CFO and a few others and say, if we want to at least have the positioning, we got to get started and this is the expense putting aside the labor concern to have. Yeah.
Amy Walsh (23:42) So, are you asking just so I’m understanding, are you asking the like level of effort for your team? Are you more concerned?
Rich Weissmark (23:47) About the cost? No, I’m asking the actual hard cost because I had Jake take it out of the original proposal just to get the cost down to get it done. Yeah. And I don’t remember the details. Yeah.
Amy Walsh (23:56) I can send it all to you via email just so you have it just what we typically charge per ncqa credentialing files. And then just so you have it, I can include the cost for delegated cred like the fee that we charge to help you towards delegation. So, you know.
Rich Weissmark (24:14) The only random comment I have on all that would be great. And I could use that as a forward with some of the explanation from you to kind of at least kind of give people informed consent that if you want to get there, we’re going to have to start exactly there’s. One, you know, the one interesting thing when I think about delegated credentialing and other organizations that I worked at obviously besides the ultimate value creator is starting providers faster, right? Obviously, but with medallion, it’s like we still get to start providers faster, but we don’t get any labor efficiencies because we already got them by paying medallion. So it’s not as it sounds funny but it’s still attractive because starting providers faster drives revenue way more meaningfully than paying for credentialing work. But because we’ve moved onto your platform and leaned out our credentialing labor that’s less of a, I can’t use that as a lever anymore when I’m trying to get people to embrace this, just the thought, you know?
Amy Walsh (25:10) Wait, I’m trying to understand your point. So are you saying because typically, just so you know, what our cred team does, Kathleen would submit the basics of the provider profile and the start date she’d be able to include for the cred file to be created before the provider is even starting to work at phynet, so we could do all the credentialing in the back end. So I don’t know if Kathleen’s doing that now or if someone’s owning that process internally.
Rich Weissmark (25:35) Well, it’s she’s doing it, but we’re leaning on you’re talking like the document gathering effort exactly. Yeah, we kind of lean on the recruiting team and now the self service workflows and medallion to get all that stuff from the providers.
Amy Walsh (25:51) Sure. Okay. Yeah. And then I think though just to add to this too is it sounds like there isn’t like a full workflow happening internally to collect all the primary source verifications for your providers in like a consolidated packet for it to then be submitted to payers. Yeah.
Rich Weissmark (26:11) I mean, there kind of is. Well, yeah, I mean, it used to be this Symplr process and I have all the historical information well organized because I just got a data dump from them. Yeah. And then there’s but on a go forward basis, it’s that process has been eliminated and it’s inviting the provider to the medallion platform and like babysitting their submission of documents. Sure.
Amy Walsh (26:35) That makes sense. Yeah. Awesome. I think what I’ll do, I’ll you know, to your point, let me think about in turn like how this would work well for phynet if you wanted to move forward with it and I’ll send you just some costs and like the slides here. So you have it the.
Rich Weissmark (26:53) More you make, the more you make it affordable email where I present a little, yeah, text that’s the better. I mean, the truth is very few people here understand anything about credentialing, which is why this project.
Amy Walsh (27:03) Has been you’re not alone… you’re not alone. Cool. But yeah, I’ll definitely send this all to you and I’ll like, you know, I’ll take some time this week to, you know, think of a strong sure email for you to forward along. But yeah, the only other few things you answered a few of my questions for next steps. One I had, so before I went out on my extended leave for my honeymoon, I feel like I heard on a call that you actually have like 484 providers you want to get into medallion? Is that still the case? I think there was some conversation around that there?
Rich Weissmark (27:42) Was some population, it was, you know, it was like pulling teeth to find organized information around here even to get to a estimation to do the deal with medallion. There is some population of providers that’s not there’s not 448, 484 providers, but there’s roughly 350 or so. Okay. And some population of them were not being managed by the previous partner for whatever reason. Okay? It’s very choppy and weird and there’s this one outlier practice that’s too long of a story for now because we’re out of time, yeah.
Amy Walsh (28:19) Yeah, yeah, that.
Rich Weissmark (28:19) Has their own arrangement and it’s very foolish, but no, there’s no big chunk like that sitting out there, but.
Amy Walsh (28:27) Okay. I thought for some reason there was like an additional 162 that you guys needed to add, but I guess not.
Rich Weissmark (28:33) Yeah, I have to look at the totals on what’s in the platform right now to properly answer that, but I, that’s fine. Our total provider count is closer to 300 and change maybe.
Amy Walsh (28:44) Perfect. Okay.
Rich Weissmark (28:45) So there’s still room based on what I’m seeing here… because it says 234 is the current provider if I’m.
Amy Walsh (28:55) following.
Rich Weissmark (28:55) that.
Amy Walsh (28:55) right. Yeah. So you exactly, you’re contracted for 322 and you have 254. For some reason, I thought you needed to add like an extra 162 to that 322.
Amy Walsh (29:04) No, I can go back to that call and try to refresh my memory on why I thought that, but it could just be me misunderstanding, which is very.
Rich Weissmark (29:11) possible. It could be, it’s been a lot of moving parts it.
Amy Walsh (29:13) Could be, yeah.
Rich Weissmark (29:16) Well, I know we’re out of time. It was good to see you. I’m glad you had a,
Amy Walsh (29:18) great time. So good to see you. Thank you. And yeah, we’ll talk more soon. I will, I look forward to talking more.
Rich Weissmark (29:25) Obrigado, yes.
Amy Walsh (29:28) Thanks, rich. Bye.