Hiring a consultant can be a high-risk activity.
Don’t get me wrong; I am definitely not disparaging consultants in general. A good consultant can get you out of a jam. I regularly rely on the wisdom of consultants, including my fellow RACmonitor authors and Monitor Mondays panelists, while assisting clients. But as much as you can be helped by a good consultant, a bad one can cause you to be drawn into a case, or even lose one.
Let me describe one of the more surreal moments of my life. A colleague and I were having lunch with a consultant who had joined a regional accounting firm. She was telling war stories to impress us. She explained that when she worked with a Medicare contractor, she was paired with an Office of Inspector General (OIG) agent investing a clinic that was owned by a physician who was born in India.
At one point, she shook her head and muttered, “he’s Indian, everyone knows all Indians commit fraud.”
After my colleague and I made sure we had not broken our jaws on the table as our mouths opened in astonishment, we sought to confirm we hadn’t misheard. She stood by her racist remark, adding that she was scared that this physician would kill her, so she and the OIG agent checked into a hotel under an assumed name and then went and stayed someplace else. Think about that for a moment: if her plan was to stay someplace else, she should have used her actual name at the first hotel, right? This consultant wasn’t just prejudiced; she was also incompetent.
At the time, I had about a dozen clients being audited by the Medicare contractor for whom this consultant had worked. Nearly all of my clients were Indian. Suddenly, everything came into clear focus. The contractor had been systematically auditing Indian physicians.
Ignoring for the moment what I think was terrible behavior by this contractor (including the fact that two oncologists had been reviewed, one born in India, one in the U.S., and the contractor told the physician from India that Zofran should rarely be used while telling the American-born physician to use Zofran whenever he thought it was appropriate), let’s return to the consultant.
To this day, she is still out there plying her wares. You could hire her. Her bio notes how often she has testified and been deposed, but it does not say “I am a complete racist” or “I judge people on stereotypes without actual information.”
So, how would you know not to hire her? I do not have a perfect answer. I can only offer a few suggestions. First, ask around. Check with multiple references. Make sure those discussions are thorough. Ask “was there anything that concerned you about him/her? Did anyone in the organization raise any concerns about the consultant? How did he or she communicate? Were they open to feedback?”
Interview potential consultants. Get them talking. Ask what trends they notice in reviews, and ask for concrete examples of how they have approached particularly complicated potential overpayments. Ask them to describe some situations where they were troubled by a client’s practice, and how they handled that issue. Ask what they do when a client dislikes their advice.
Determine if they view their role as an enforcer or a defender. Consider which approach you prefer: do you want them to resolve ambiguity in favor of the government’s position, or in favor of you? Or perhaps you want an expert who presents BOTH positions, and lets you pick the approach you prefer.
I cannot promise that the diligence will help you avoid hiring a bad expert, but at least your odds will improve.
Program Note:
Listen to David Glaser every Monday on Monitor Mondays, 10-10:30 a.m. EDT.
Picture this: You are driving through an area you don’t know well. It is a cold day. You stop to get gas. You fill the
There is a lot of talk lately about the need to follow orders given by a member of law enforcement. I would like to explore
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
