Published Engagements
Every engagement here started the same way: a billing system that had stopped fitting the practice it was built for. Different specialties, different problems, different workflows built to fix them.
What follows is the work itself rather than a summary of it. Each write-up covers what was failing, what we built in its place, and the reporting the practice now runs on. Where figures are published they are the practice figures, before/after, and the arithmetic is there to check.
One pattern runs through all of them. In every case the charges were already correct and the care had already been delivered. The revenue existed. What had broken was the path back into the practice, whether that meant claims nobody followed after submission, enrollments that were never completed, or a ledger nobody had reconciled.
Results across published engagements
The figures below combine the three engagements with monthly figures. All three are verifiable against the case studies they came from. The Divine Dermatology audit produced a one-time outcome rather than a monthly one, so its figures sit with that case study rather than in this total.
Two of the three practices billed exactly the same charges before and after. No additional patients, no new providers, no change to coding, and every dollar came from collecting revenue that had already been earned. The third submitted 40% more claims while collections rose 340%, so the bulk of its recovery came from the same place: claims that were already going out and were not being followed.
Two reimbursement models running through a workflow built for one. Dual-track billing lifted the gross collection rate from 18.2% to 61% on identical charge volume.
Billing $178,237 a month and collecting nothing. The ERA and EFT enrollments had never been set up, so payments had no way to post.
Roughly $100,000 in unreconciled patient credit balances left behind by a previous billing team. A forensic true-up audit traced $60,000 of it to posting errors rather than money owed to patients, with documentation attached to every line.
Transport billing does not behave like clinical billing. Monthly claim volume rose 40% once stalled claims were resolved against the dispatch log, but collections rose 340%, because most of the money was sitting in claims already submitted and never worked.
What your assessment would look like
A 45-minute review of denial rates, AR aging, payer mix, and billing workflow. No sales presentation. If the numbers show an opportunity, we build a custom engagement. If they do not, we say so.
Get a Free Revenue Assessment →