Prepared for Lake Heart Specialists · Libertyville & Gurnee, Lake County, Illinois · 2026 Remote Care Strategy Review · Confidential — not for distribution
Cardiovascular Service Line Optimization · Lake County, Illinois

A Scalable, Profitable Remote Care Service Line
for Lake Heart Specialists.

Across the same six physicians in CY2024, remote physiologic monitoring, chronic care management, principal care management and transitional care management billed zero — an entire recurring reimbursement layer the fee schedule pays for and this practice leaves unclaimed. The workflow gap is the shortest we have measured: the clinic already runs 2,854 remote rhythm-monitor evaluations a year across 356 beneficiaries inside about $485,000 of remote monitoring, so consent, device logistics and the review habit are solved. The one missing piece is the layer that measures the patient and bills for it.

$0
24-Month Net Reimbursement
0%
24-Month Practice Margin
0
Hospitalizations Avoided
0
Unique Patients in Active Remote Care at Month 24

Source: the companion CoachCare Value Analysis workbook, MAC locality IL • 06102-15.
And the market fact that makes them unusually durable: Medicare Advantage covers only 34.0% of Lake County's Medicare beneficiaries, against 42.8% for Illinois and 50.1% nationally — so roughly two-thirds of this county's Medicare population is still traditional fee-for-service, which is precisely the population these codes are written for.

The Position of Strength

The Shortest Workflow Gap We Have Measured

The standard objection to remote physiologic monitoring is that a practice has neither the staff, the consent process, the device logistics nor the review discipline to run it. Every one of those objections is pre-answered here by the practice's own claims record. Capability is proven. What remains to add is a device that measures the patient rather than the implant, an enrolment engine, and the billing capture that turns an existing habit into a service line.

★ Verified — CY2024 claims

Roughly 238 remote reviews a month, on rhythm monitors alone

CPT 93298 — remote cardiac rhythm monitor evaluation — covered 356 beneficiaries across 2,854 services and $297,596 of Medicare allowed, billed by four of the six physicians. That is an established remote-data review cadence measured in the hundreds of transmissions per month, before pacemaker interrogation and mobile telemetry are counted at all.

★ Verified — and stated precisely

About $485,000 of remote monitoring proper

Remote-monitoring-adjacent allowed charges total roughly $856,000 — but that headline figure includes $371,470 of CPT 33285, which is insertable-cardiac-monitor insertion: a procedure, not monitoring. Monitoring proper — rhythm-monitor evaluation, pacemaker interrogation and technical support, mobile cardiac telemetry and extended external ECG — comes to about $485,000 a year. The narrower figure makes the same point and survives scrutiny.

★ Verified — the best panel in the file

An HCC risk score of 1.991, roughly twice national

Mean beneficiary age 77, with 61.6% aged 75 or over. Heart failure 42.6%, atrial fibrillation 41.7%, diabetes 45.5%, chronic kidney disease 40.5%, ischemic heart disease 51.8%. In this panel, remote-care candidates are the majority, not a subgroup that has to be screened for.

★ Verified — the whitespace

Care management at zero, on every code, for all six physicians

Each physician NPI was queried individually across remote physiologic monitoring (99453 · 99454 · 99457 · 99458 · 99091), remote therapeutic monitoring, chronic care management, principal care management (99424–99427), transitional care management (99495 · 99496), behavioural-health integration and telephone evaluation and management. Zero services, on every code, for every physician.

✓ Verified — the ancillary precedent

A group that has already built margin-positive in-office service lines, more than once

Six physicians produced $6,320,049 of Medicare allowed charges across 49,043 services in CY2024. The largest single line is not an office visit — it is cardiac PET myocardial perfusion imaging at roughly $1,588,000, with technetium SPECT at about $526,000, complete echocardiography at about $362,000, carotid and venous duplex at about $165,000, and a varicose-vein ablation practice at about $217,000. This practice owns its nuclear and PET laboratory, its echocardiography laboratory, its vascular ultrasound and a vein clinic. A remote care service line is the same motion, in a channel it has not entered.

✓ Verified — the post-discharge funnel

3,807 subsequent hospital-care services, and no transitional care billed against any of them

Alongside 913 higher-level subsequent hospital-care services and 659 initial hospital-care services — an active, substantial inpatient rounding practice. Every one of those admissions opened a 30-day window this practice was clinically positioned to own. Transitional care management is deliberately excluded from every financial figure on this page, which makes it a separate, additive decision the owners can take on its own merits.

Delivery capacity is not the constraint either: the roster is six physicians and four nurse practitioners — ten clinicians across two offices. The operating habit exists. The billable layer on top of it does not.

The 2026 Payment Environment

The Fee Schedule Moved Toward This Practice, and So Did the Local Payer Mix

Two things changed in the practice's favour, and neither of them requires it to change what it bills today. The CY2026 fee schedule made short and low-intensity monitoring windows cleanly billable for the first time. And this county's Medicare book is unusually fee-for-service, which is the population these codes pay on.

New for CY2026
99445

The 16-Day Floor Is Gone

99445 pays the monthly device-supply amount for 2–15 days of data, where sixteen or more days were previously required. That makes short post-discharge and post-implant windows billable for the first time — the windows a practice recording 3,807 subsequent hospital-care services a year generates and does not currently monetise.

It also softens the mechanical gate that historically decided whether a monitored month billed at all: device transmission compliance.

New for CY2026
99470

Ten Minutes, Not Twenty

99470 pays for the first 10 minutes of monthly management time where the floor had previously been 20. That materially widens the population for whom a monitored month is billable — particularly stable patients under maintenance monitoring, who are the majority of any mature census.

Taken together, the two codes shift remote monitoring from a programme that only pays for densely engaged patients to one that pays across a whole managed census. That is the shape of the opportunity in a panel this size.

Timing
No external clock

Pure Upside, Which Is Why It Slips

This practice carries no mandatory model exposure — pure-upside timing, and prepared if selection maps change.

A service line chartered in late 2026 is operating at census through 2027, on codes whose values expanded in 2026, against a panel that qualifies almost universally. There is no external deadline forcing the decision, which is why naming a physician lead and a first-enrolment date is the highest-leverage act available.

The market structure this billing model actually wants
  • 34.0% versus 42.8% versus 50.1% Medicare Advantage penetration in Lake County, against Illinois and the nation. Roughly two-thirds of the county's 133,352 Medicare beneficiaries remain in Original Medicare — a nine-point gap to the state and a sixteen-point gap to the nation. Source: CMS Medicare Monthly Enrollment, data through April 2026, county FIPS 17097.
  • 88,024 in traditional fee-for-service Transitional care, remote physiologic monitoring and principal care management are fee-for-service benefits. Their economics work best where the fee-for-service pool is deep. Here it is deep, it is the majority payer, and the county's Medicare book grew about 3.2% in the most recent year.
  • $110,416 median household income — 37% above the national figure — with families below poverty at 5.8% against 8.8% nationally, only 6.9% uninsured, and 47.7% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or higher. Source: American Community Survey 2024 five-year estimates, cross-checked against three independent detail tables.
  • Why that is operational, not decorative The 20% patient coinsurance is the most common patient-side objection to launching these programmes and the reason many stall at enrolment. Dense secondary coverage and low uninsurance make that friction unusually weak in this specific market — and educational attainment proxies device-onboarding success and portal adoption, which drive the transmission compliance the largest recurring code depends on.
  • One counterweight, and it belongs in the file The county's 65-and-over share is 15.8%, below both Illinois (17.0%) and the nation (17.2%). This is an affluent county but a comparatively young one. The case rests on absolute Medicare volume, on the unusually low Medicare Advantage penetration and on payer quality — not on senior density.
Independence, and the one question that has to be asked first
  • The billing right sits here The practice trades as Lake Heart Specialists and bills Medicare under its own separately enrolled professional service corporation, registered in Illinois under an eponymous legal name that this page does not reproduce. It holds its own organizational NPI, with no organizational subpart and no parent organization recorded in the national registry.
  • Its own billing TIN, in the shared-savings file The practice appears in the current programme-year Medicare Shared Savings Program participant file under its own legal business name. Participants in that file are identified by billing TIN — an employed group's claims roll up under its employer's legal entity and it would not appear under its own name. Its patient portal is Veradigm's rather than the admitting system's Epic-based platform, and patient payments route to a practice-branded merchant account.
  • The network was built to hold practices like this one Of the accountable care organization's 175 participant TINs, only ten carry the health system's own branding; the other 165 are overwhelmingly independent Illinois practices. Membership is affirmatively consistent with independence — and it confers no exclusivity: several directly competing cardiology and vascular TINs participate alongside.
  • Two-sided risk, and a real one The organization operates in the Enhanced track across four states with 134,269 assigned beneficiaries. In programme year 2024 it produced $70,729,397 of gross savings at a 3.85% savings rate and earned $51,986,107 at a 75% final share rate, on a quality score of 85.37. Results are reported at organization level, not practice level.
  • Discovery question number one Unresolved Whether the clinically integrated network already supplies care-management, care-coordination or remote-monitoring infrastructure to its independent member practices could not be established from any public source. Its public reporting documents how shared savings were spent but documents no member-facing care-management service; third-party descriptions characterise it as supplying analytics and population-health tooling rather than a staffed remote-care service line. Ask it directly, and ask it first.
  • Why it bears less on the decision than it first appears Even where a network supplies analytics and population-health support, the fee-for-service billing right for remote monitoring and care management travels with the practice's own TIN — and this practice holds its own. Any fee-for-service remote-care revenue accrues here, not to the network. The question bears on whether the practice feels a need, not on whether it can bill.
The thesis, stated narrowly so it survives scrutiny. A practice with a panel at roughly twice national acuity already runs a sustained remote cardiac monitoring operation, already reviews remote data several hundred times a month, and already carries four advanced-practice providers on payroll. It bills nothing at all for remote physiologic monitoring, care management or the post-discharge window it generates in volume. It sits in a county where two-thirds of Medicare is still fee-for-service, and it owns the TIN that would bill. Those are facts describing one gap — and the remote care service line that closes it is a thing the owners can simply buy.
Heart Failure · 42.6%
Atrial Fibrillation · 41.7%
Uncontrolled Hypertension
Cardiorenal · CKD 40.5%
The Operating Model

One Service Line, Three Sequenced Layers

A named service line with its own owner, P&L and scorecard, following the Medicare patient from the hospital bed back into the clinic and then across the year. It is built once and reused for every lever the practice already cares about, rather than bolted onto a single condition.

1 · At Discharge — TCM
  • What Structured 30-day post-discharge management: interactive contact within two business days, medication reconciliation, and a face-to-face visit inside the window.
  • Why here 3,807 subsequent hospital-care services, 913 higher-level subsequent services and 659 initial hospital-care services in CY2024 — and zero transitional care billed against any of them. The largest single identified gap in the account.
  • Deliberately excluded Transitional care revenue is left out of every financial figure on this page so the forecast stays conservative. It is a separate, additive decision.
2 · The First Two Weeks — Short-Window RPM
  • What A 2–15-day device supply and first-10-minute management bundle (99445 · 99470) placed on the patient at discharge or at implant, before the window closes.
  • Why here CY2026 is the first year this window is cleanly billable. Post-discharge weight, blood pressure and pulse are where a readmission is either caught or missed — and 88 insertable cardiac monitors were placed in CY2024, each of which opens a follow-up relationship of exactly this shape.
  • Distinct from the device Physiologic monitoring is a separate benefit over separate data, explicitly not the implant's own telemetry.
3 · Across the Year — RPM + PCM
  • RPM Device-based physiologic monitoring — weight, blood pressure, pulse oximetry — as the continuous early-warning and titration layer across the heart failure, hypertension, rhythm and cardiorenal panels.
  • PCM Principal Care Management for a single high-risk cardiac condition. In a cardiology panel the dominant condition genuinely is the cardiac one — the clinical situation this benefit was written for, and the monthly chassis the programme runs on.
  • Modeled The value analysis below models RPM and PCM only. Chronic care management is carried at zero eligibility — it is the multi-condition instrument of primary care, and this practice has no primary-care panel to bill it against.
The staffing answer, up front. CoachCare operates the engine — enrolment outreach, device logistics, 24/7 monitoring, escalation, and billing-ready documentation — while the practice's physicians govern the protocols and make every clinical decision. Launch requires no new headcount on the practice's side. The forecast also assumes one on-site enrolment specialist funded by CoachCare: that specialist is CoachCare's expense and embedded value, and is never a deduction from practice margin.
The one boundary this practice has to get right. Implanted-device interrogation (93294–93298) and patient physiologic monitoring (99453 onward) are different benefits over different data — the implant's own telemetry versus patient-generated readings from a separate connected device. A practice billing about $485,000 a year of the former and nothing of the latter has to design around one rule above all others: the same data stream is never billed twice, and the documentation must make the distinction obvious on its face. Separately, only one practitioner may bill remote physiologic monitoring for a given patient in any 30-day period, so the attribution policy with referring primary care has to be written down before the first enrolment rather than discovered through denials.

The CY2026 Billing Stack

ServiceCodes~CY2026 MagnitudeCardiovascular UseIn the model?
Transitional Care Management99495 · 99496~$200 / ~$280Every cardiac discharge the practice already rounds on — 3,807 subsequent hospital-care services in CY2024No — upside
RPM setup & device supply99453 · 99454 · 99445 (new)~$20 setup · ~$52/mo99445 unlocks the 2–15-day post-discharge and post-implant windowYes
RPM treatment management99457 · 99458 · 99470 (new)~$52 + ~$41 add'l · ~$26Monthly review, titration, escalation; 99470 covers the first 10 minutesYes
Principal Care Management99424 · 99425 · 99426 · 99427~$79 / ~$57 · ~$60 + ~$50 add'lA single high-risk cardiac condition expected to last ≥3 months — heart failure at 42.6% prevalenceYes
Chronic Care Management99490 · 99439 · 99487 · 99491The multi-condition primary-care instrument — no primary-care panel here to bill it againstCarried at zero

The value analysis below uses CY2026 rates auto-resolved by MAC carrier and locality for zip 60048 — IL • 06102-15.

One Build, Every Lever

The same infrastructure — enrolment, devices, alert triage, escalation, documentation, billing capture — powers each thing the practice already cares about.

The standalone P&L
$3,579,961 of modeled 24-month net reimbursement at a 42.23% practice margin, billed under the practice's own TIN. It depends on no reconciliation, no shared-savings determination, no hospital agreement and no third party's performance year. That is why it leads this page rather than following a value-based argument.
The device cohort as the pilot
356 beneficiaries on remote rhythm monitoring and roughly 301 on remote pacemaker interrogation are the shortest first cohort available anywhere in the practice. They are already identified, already consented to remote follow-up, and already known to the staff who would run the programme. Attaching physiologic monitoring and principal care management to a population already conditioned to remote review is materially faster than building enrolment from a cold panel.
The far larger non-device panel
The great majority of a panel carrying 42.6% heart failure and 41.7% atrial fibrillation has no implanted device at all — and is therefore completely unreachable through the device channel. Non-invasive weight and blood-pressure monitoring plus principal care management is the layer that does not exist today, and it is where the volume is.
Readmission exposure and referral defence
Daily physiologic signal with 24/7 triage turns deterioration into a same-week outpatient intervention instead of an emergency-department visit — and a monitored patient stays attached to the practice that monitors them. The admitting system operates its own employed cardiology group, its own electrophysiology service and its own heart-failure clinic in the same town; an electrophysiology-focused independent practice operates in Libertyville as well. Network membership is not exclusivity and it is not protection.
Device-clinic capacity
There is no electrophysiologist on this bench — and the practice implants insertable cardiac monitors, follows roughly 301 pacemaker patients remotely and evaluates 356 rhythm monitors, work carried by the general and heart-failure cardiologists. That is a real operational load on a six-physician bench, and it is the single best entry point for a conversation about who reviews what, with what capacity, and with which alert protocols.
Shared-savings contribution
A monitored heart-failure and cardiorenal census is one of the few levers a cardiology practice holds over total cost of care — and these patients are attributed inside an Enhanced-track, two-sided-risk accountable care organization with 134,269 assigned beneficiaries. The fee-for-service revenue accrues to the practice regardless of how the organization distributes savings, and nothing in the modeled economics on this page depends on any shared-savings determination.
Hypertension whitespace
Hypertension prevalence in this panel is at or above the CMS reporting cap of 75%, and chronic kidney disease is 40.5%. That is the natural candidate pool for a protocolised resistant-hypertension pathway — and blood-pressure remote monitoring is intrinsic to any such pathway, for candidate identification, for titration and for evidence.
Technology Architecture

Veradigm: The Integration Is the Reason 64,112 Claims Are Even Possible

In most accounts the electronic health record is a scoping question. Here it is a cycle-time advantage and a capture-rate answer at the same time — because the practice owns its instance outright, and because a programme that generates tens of thousands of small, condition-dependent monthly claims cannot be billed by hand.

What is verified about the platform
  • Confirmed The practice's patient portal is FollowMyHealth — Veradigm's patient-engagement and portal product — referenced in seven places across the practice site. This corroborates the commercially reported Veradigm ambulatory electronic health record.
  • Verified by absence, and it doubles as ownership evidence There is no reference anywhere on the site to the admitting system's own patient portal, no MyChart reference, and no Epic string of any kind. A practice employed by or absorbed into that system would be on its Epic instance and would route patients there. This one does not.
  • Independent revenue cycle Patient payments route to a practice-branded merchant portal rather than to system billing — independent collections and an independent claim-to-cash path, which is what a programme billing recurring monthly codes needs.
  • The commercially significant consequence Because the practice owns its record instance outright, with no health-system technology governance in the way, an integration decision can be taken by the physician owners rather than escalated to a system technology committee. Against an employed group that is a cycle-time advantage measured in quarters.
What still has to be confirmed — and how we treat it
  • The existing device platform is a discovery question Which vendor platform runs the current device and telemetry monitoring is not discoverable from any public source. The new programme has to complement that installed workflow rather than collide with it, so identifying it early is high-value.
  • Treat monitoring governance as a conversation with experts A practice with this much remote-monitoring history will hold strong, well-informed opinions about alert thresholds, escalation and documentation. Alert design here is reconciliation with an existing discipline, not an education.
THE PRACTICE'S OWN RECORD Cohort built from the chart Problem lists · medications · encounters Heart failure · AFib · hypertension · CKD ONE ORDER, INSIDE THE CHART Integrated ordering & enrolment Enrolment flags and trigger ordering by service Enrolment status visible in the existing workflow COACHCARE OPERATES Consent · devices · monitoring Cellular connected devices, shipped and activated Daily data · 24/7 triage · escalation BACK INTO THE RECORD — AND STRAIGHT INTO THE CLAIM Evidence of care, vitals and care plans attached to the chart monthly · claims generated automatically to practice management Days of data · minutes of management time · supervision requirements — each condition checked by the billing engine rather than by a person Analytics returned monthly: census · capture rate · net reimbursement per patient per month · device compliance · alert-to-contact time 64,112 modeled billed units, 24 months
Why it matters here · 1

Time-and-threshold codes fail silently

99454 requires 16 days of data in a 30-day period; 99445 requires 2 to 15; 99457 requires 20 minutes of management time and 99470 the first 10; the principal-care codes carry 30-minute and supervision requirements. Every one of those conditions is a place where a clinically delivered service quietly fails to become a billed service.

Why it matters here · 2

The administrative layer is sized for six physicians

On top of a heavy inpatient rounding practice and a substantial in-office ancillary book — nuclear and PET imaging, echocardiography, vascular ultrasound, a vein clinic. Adding tens of thousands of small monthly claims as a manual step would be the fastest way to make the programme fail.

Why it matters here · 3

Capture rate is the metric that decides the P&L

Billed divided by eligible. It does not appear in most programme business cases and it is the reason most of them underperform: a census that is monitored but not billed produces the clinical benefit and none of the revenue. It belongs on the monthly scorecard from month one.

Why it matters here · 4

Nobody has to learn a new system

The integration uses the record's own built-in workflows so enrolment, documentation and claim generation live where the clinical work already happens — enrolment status visible in the existing workflow, supporting documents attached to the chart monthly, and the claim produced as a by-product of the monitoring record.

Integration capabilities are CoachCare-provided.

The Clinical Twin of the Value Analysis

Clinical Governance & Escalation

The economics prove the service line pays. This proves it is safe and disciplined. Every reading a patient takes routes through one shared escalation engine with defined thresholds, defined trends, defined routing and a defined documentation standard — so the care team receives signal, not noise, and never carries surveillance liability it did not agree to. In a practice that already triages several hundred remote transmissions a month, that discipline is the part that has to be right.

One shared escalation engine

Both programmes in this service line — remote physiologic monitoring and principal care management — route through the same logic. The engine is programme-agnostic; the thresholds are set with the practice, and are explicitly reconciled with the alert protocols the device clinic already runs.

1

Critical value → escalate immediately

A reading at a critical threshold escalates regardless of whether the patient reports symptoms. There is no "wait and see" branch on a critical value, and no client preference can suppress it.

2

Out of range → retake, then symptom check

A non-critical out-of-range reading is worked rather than forwarded: confirm technique, retake, then run a structured symptom check. Most out-of-range readings resolve here — which is why the clinic inbox stays clean.

3

Trend is defined objectively

An out-of-range trend is not a judgement call. It is three consecutive readings at least one hour apart for blood pressure or glucose, or three readings within seven days for heart rate. A confirmed trend escalates on the same footing as a threshold breach.

4

Unreachable is not a dead end

If the patient cannot be reached, the attempt is documented, a voicemail and callback request are left — and if the reading was critical or a confirmed trend, the escalation proceeds anyway. Silence never downgrades a clinical finding.

5

Every escalation is documented the same way

Six fields, every time, so the record is auditable and any event can be reconstructed end to end.

VitalFindingsMethodContactOutcomeFollow-up
The emergent pathway — non-negotiable
  • Triggers Chest pain · new shortness of breath · signs of stroke · syncope · worst-ever headache · sudden swelling. Any of these reported during an outreach call activates the emergent protocol immediately.
  • Action 911 is called with the patient still on the line — the call is not ended and handed off.
  • If refused If the patient declines emergency services, they are routed to the clinic and the refusal is documented; if the situation warrants it, CoachCare activates 911 regardless.
  • The guarantee CoachCare's urgent and emergent policy supersedes any client-specific escalation preference. A practice can shape routing for everything else. It cannot lower the floor on an emergency.
Three-way routing — so the care team sees signal, not noise
  • Emergency Emergent symptoms or a critical value with clinical instability → 911, with the practice notified.
  • Non-critical A confirmed out-of-range reading or trend without emergent features → routed to the defined practice team member named in the escalation matrix, within the agreed window.
  • Stable / resolved Worked, retaken, resolved, patient asymptomatic → documented as an FYI in the record, not pushed as an alert. This is the branch that determines whether the programme is sustainable in a practice already running a device inbox at scale.
  • Named, not assumed The routing matrix — who receives what, in what window, and who covers after hours — is agreed with the practice before the first patient enrols, not improvised afterward.

The post-discharge three-touch cadence

Triggered automatically by any emergency-room visit or hospitalisation reported in the last 60 days. This is the readmission-prevention spine — the mechanism behind the 171 hospitalizations avoided in the forecast below — and it is the workflow that finally attaches to the 3,807 subsequent hospital-care services this practice already delivers every year.

Touch 1 · Day 1–2

Stabilise

Confirm the patient is home and safe, reconcile discharge medications against what is actually in the house, verify follow-up appointments exist, and confirm the monitoring device is set up and transmitting. Clinical alerts documented and escalated per the engine above.

Touch 2 · Day 5–8

Detect

The window where post-discharge decompensation typically declares itself. Symptom review, weight and blood-pressure trend review against the readings already flowing in, adherence check, and escalation on any confirmed threshold or trend.

Touch 3 · Day 12–14

Secure

Confirm the follow-up visit happened, close open issues, verify the patient understands the escalation path, and hand the patient into the longitudinal monitoring panel so the 30-day window closes with continuity rather than a cliff.

Continuity and discharge governance

Patients do not silently fall out of the programme, and the care team is notified at every decision point.

A

Unreachable → escalate on a fixed cadence

A patient who stops responding is escalated to the practice first, then re-escalated every 30 days — not quietly dropped and not left accruing.

B

A hard backstop

If no instruction is received from the practice, discharge proceeds at 180 days. The clinic is notified in every case, and discharges generally process in the first week of the following month.

C

The practice always decides

Clinical discharge criteria, escalation thresholds and routing are the practice's to set. CoachCare executes them consistently and documents the execution — it does not overrule clinical judgement, with the single exception of the emergent floor above.

D

Auditable by design

Because every escalation carries the same six documented fields, any episode can be reconstructed end to end — which is what a practice already accustomed to defending a remote-monitoring record will expect.

Escalation thresholds, the routing matrix and the discharge criteria are configured with the practice's physicians during protocol design — the logic above is the standard operating floor, not a substitute for that design session, and here that session starts by reconciling with alert protocols the practice already runs.
CoachCare Value Analysis · Modeled for Lake Heart Specialists

The Value Analysis

A 24-month forecast for a two-programme service line — remote physiologic monitoring and principal care management — across two offices, ten referring clinicians, one CoachCare-funded on-site enrolment specialist, and CY2026 rates auto-resolved for MAC locality IL • 06102-15. Transitional care management revenue, avoided-admission savings, any shared-savings contribution, and any Medicare Advantage or commercial volume are not in these numbers. They are upside on top.

Enrolled Services Under Active Management

Monthly active enrolment by programme · physician and advanced-practice referrals (8 per clinician per month across 10 clinicians at 80% acceptance) plus one on-site enrolment specialist at 80 per month and a small telephonic stream, net of a 1.5% monthly discharge rate. Both arms are enrolment-limited, not eligibility-limited: RPM reaches 2,079 at month 24 against a modeled ceiling of 2,552, and PCM reaches 824 against a ceiling of 2,480. Neither has run out of eligible patients — both are still climbing.

Monthly Economics — Net Reimbursement, Fees, Practice Margin

Net reimbursement after a 13% blended reduction for denials, coinsurance and bad debt, against CoachCare fees. Month 1 runs a $2,836 deficit because one-time implementation lands there; the programme turns margin-positive in month 2 and stays positive every month while the census compounds.

24-Month Net Reimbursement Mix

$3.58M total across the two-programme stack. Remote monitoring is the larger arm and ramps faster; principal care management carries the greater unexploited headroom.

The Financial Summary

LineYear 1Year 224-Month
RPM net reimbursement$644,858$1,969,046$2,613,904
PCM net reimbursement$233,859$732,198$966,057
Total net reimbursement$878,717$2,701,244$3,579,961
CoachCare fees$513,262$1,554,979$2,068,240
Practice net (after fees)$365,455$1,146,266$1,511,721
Practice margin41.59%42.44%42.23%
Includes one on-site enrolment specialist staffed at CoachCare's expense — embedded value already reflected in the fees above, never a deduction from practice margin.

Month-1 practice profit is −$2,836; the first profitable month is month 2. Year 2 net reimbursement is 3.1× Year 1 on the same referral engine and the same ten clinicians — the difference is entirely census accumulation. Fee-for-service only. The full model is available as a companion workbook.

64,112

Billed Claims / Units

Recurring, subscription-like professional-fee volume over 24 months — on top of the existing imaging, echocardiography, vascular and procedural book, not instead of it. At this volume the claim has to be generated by the billing engine, not assembled by hand.

269,955

Physiologic Readings

A continuous clinical picture of the heart failure, hypertension, rhythm and cardiorenal panels between visits — the physiologic twin of the device data these clinicians already review several hundred times a month.

~171

Hospitalizations Avoided

On the order of $2.6M of avoided acute cost at $15,000 per admission.

13.9

FTE-Equivalent Absorbed

29,014 care-team hours of monitoring, outreach, escalation and documentation carried by the service line rather than by the practice's own staff — alongside 128,225 care-management tasks, 32,056 chart updates and 19,234 patient conversations.

All of it is priced at fee-for-service rates for MAC locality IL • 06102-15; Medicare Advantage and commercial volume are excluded rather than assumed, and are additive.

Test the Assumptions Yourself

Scenario Explorer

Every input below is an assumption, and every assumption is arguable. Move them and the 24-month forecast recomputes live. At the modeled settings this engine reproduces the companion Value Analysis workbook exactly — so any disagreement you have with the output is really a disagreement with an input, which is a much more productive conversation.

Build Your Own Forecast

Defaults are the modeled scenario. Enrolment ceilings are recomputed as panel × eligibility × conversion; RPM eligibility is 75% of the in-scope panel and PCM 85%. Because neither arm reaches its ceiling inside 24 months at the modeled settings, referral throughput and enrolment capacity move the outputs almost directly.
24-mo net reimbursement
$3.58M
24-mo practice margin
$1.51M
Margin %
42.2%
Enrolled services at M24
2,903
Hospitalizations avoided
~171

"Enrolled services" counts active programme enrolments; a patient enrolled in both programmes counts twice. At month 24 the model's 2,903 enrolled services correspond to 2,326 unique patients once dual enrolment is deduplicated. Month 24 is not the programme's terminal size — both arms are still climbing against their ceilings, so the constraint to manage is enrolment capacity, not patient supply. All outputs are fee-for-service.

Implementation

Chartered in 30 Days.
First Billable Enrolment by Day 90.

CoachCare operates the engine — enrolment outreach, device logistics, 24/7 monitoring, escalation and billing-ready documentation — while the practice's physicians govern the protocols and make every clinical decision. Full-service delivery means launch requires no new headcount on the practice's side, and the on-site enrolment specialist in the model is funded by CoachCare. There is no capital call and no ramp period during which the practice funds a loss.

0–30 Days

Charter and Confirm

Name the physician lead, charter the service line with its own P&L and scorecard, and agree the target populations. Ask the network care-management question and get an answer. Write the attribution and coordination policy with referring primary care before the first enrolment. Confirm the billing configuration for MAC locality IL • 06102-15, and confirm the ambulatory product line and interface surface.

31–90 Days

Stand Up, Then Pilot the Two Shortest Cohorts

Integration built against the practice's own record; alert thresholds and the escalation matrix set by the physician lead and explicitly reconciled with the existing device-clinic protocols; the on-site enrolment specialist placed across Libertyville and Gurnee in rotation. First cohort: the existing device population — already identified, already consented, already known to the staff. Second: the post-discharge cohort, on the three-touch cadence with short-window monitoring placed at discharge. First billable enrolment inside 90 days; month 2 is the first net-positive month in the model.

91–180 Days

Extend to the Far Larger Non-Device Panel

Non-device heart failure, atrial fibrillation, uncontrolled hypertension and cardiorenal pathways added across both offices. Open a second enrolment pathway alongside the on-site specialist — because both arms are enrolment-limited rather than eligibility-limited, throughput converts almost directly into revenue and months matter in a compounding model. Monthly scorecard reporting census, capture rate, revenue per patient-month, escalation volume and device compliance.

181–365 Days

Institutionalise, and Take the Transitional-Care Decision on Its Merits

Capture rate and readmission delta reported against the unenrolled panel; the practice's contribution to its accountable care organization measured rather than asserted; the transitional care management decision taken separately and additively. A standing programme rather than a plan when the CY2027 fee schedule lands.

About CoachCare

The Experience to Get It Right

The service line described on this page runs on infrastructure already proven at national scale.

500,000+

Patients Managed

Over 400 managed conditions for more than 500,000 patients.

10,000+

Clinicians on the Platform

Providers running remote care programmes on the platform.

1,000+

Implementations

Remote care programmes implemented and running.

5M+

Claims Generated

Care plan coding and billing generating over five million claims.

100M+

Vitals Recorded

Over 100 million vitals and more than four million care actions recorded.

Policy Watch · CMS-1848-P

2027 Proposed Rule Insights

CMS's CY2027 Physician Fee Schedule proposed rule, published July 16, 2026, proposes to reprice remote physiologic monitoring. Here is what it reaches, what it leaves alone, and how the operating model behind this service line absorbs it.

1

The Proposal Is Confined to RPM

CMS's remote-monitoring proposals sit in one code family: RPM. CCM, PCM, and TCM are not part of them. That distinction lands directly on this forecast — PCM carries $966,057 of the modeled $3,579,961 in 24-month net reimbursement, and the TCM touch at discharge is outside the proposal entirely. Neither is in scope.

2

CoachCare Is Building the Contingencies Now

The delivery model has more than one shape, and CoachCare is preparing each so the service line's economics hold wherever the rule settles. One unbundles the program into its parts — SaaS platform, device logistics, and program enablement — priced as components. Another engages CoachCare to run the staffing itself, an MSO-style arrangement in which the practice owns the clinical program and the billing while CoachCare carries the labor model. Neither requires re-architecting the service line described on this page.

3

ACCESS Moves Remote Care to Risk-Based PMPM

Alongside the fee schedule, CMS's ACCESS Model pays remote care as a risk-based per-member-per-month arrangement rather than per code: recurring per-beneficiary payments, half of each one withheld and reconciled against outcome attainment. Cardiometabolic care is among its four clinical tracks. What earns under that structure — controlled pressures, titrated therapy, decompensations caught early — is what this service line is built to produce.

What the Proposal Actually Takes Off This Forecast

This forecast repriced code by code at CMS's CY2027 proposed values, at this practice's own MAC locality rather than national averages. Same enrollment, same phasing plan — only the rates move.

−20.5%
The headline per-code cut — device supply (99454 / 99445), the code the proposal reprices hardest.
−8.4%
The RPM patient-year, because device supply is only 31% of it — the management codes barely move.
−6.3%
The whole service line, because PCM carries 27.0% of the forecast and is not in scope.
RPM alone — the only code family in scope$2,613,904 over 24 months
−$219,730
−8.4% of RPM
The whole service line — RPM + PCM$3,579,961 over 24 months
−$224,939
−6.3% of the whole

Both bars run on the same dollar scale, so the red slice is nearly the same width in each — the same dollars, measured against a larger base. The empty track on the top bar is the care-management revenue RPM alone does not include.

RPM, retained at CY2027 proposed rates The proposed reduction PCM — not in scope

Repriced at this locality's own geographic adjusters. The RPM reductions fall almost entirely on practice expense, so the untouched work component carries more weight in some localities than others; the same repricing at national rates would be −8.8% on RPM. Of the $224,939, RPM accounts for $219,730 and the care-management arm for $5,209.

Where the Proposal Lands, Code Family by Code Family

CY2026 versus CMS's published CY2027 proposed values, shown at national non-facility amounts so they can be read against CMS's own tables. This practice's locality-adjusted amounts differ; the repricing above uses the local figures.

Code familyWhat CMS proposedCY2026CY2027 proposedChange
In scope — remote physiologic monitoring
99454 / 99445 · device supplyPractice expense recrosswalked$52.11$41.38−21%
99457 · management, first 20 minDirect practice expense removed$51.77$49.59−4%
99458 · management, each addl 20 minDirect practice expense removed$41.42$40.39−2%
99453 · setup and patient educationCrosswalked; one-time per patient$21.71$20.03−8%
Not in scope — the codes the proposal does not reach
99424–99427 · PCMNo structural change proposed$67.80$67.00−1%
99495 / 99496 · TCMNot addressed by the proposalOutside the remote-monitoring provisions entirely

National non-facility amounts; CY2027 values are CMS's own published proposals in Addendum B of CMS-1848-P. The care-management rows show the lead code in each family; every code in those families moves within about 4% in either direction, which is ordinary annual movement rather than a repricing. The RPM reductions are also phased — section 1848(c)(7) of the Act caps any one code's total-RVU reduction at 19% in a single year, and CMS publishes the affected codes, so CY2027 is a single-digit year for a typical program and the remainder arrives no earlier than CY2028.

None of this is final. CMS-1848-P is a proposed rule. Comments are due September 14, 2026, the final rule is expected in early November, and it takes effect January 1, 2027. CoachCare is leading the advocacy — filing comments, putting the device cost and pricing evidence in front of CMS that the rule itself states the agency does not have, and helping practices file their own. This practice gets the final rates, and the model rerun against them, the week they publish.