Know the file.
Keep the source candidate and review version identifiable, with coverage and limitations visible.
Hospital MRF workbench
See what needs attention before you publish.
Bring file checks, issue owners and review evidence into one workbench—alongside your existing machine-readable file (MRF) vendor or internal team.
Early-stage. Preparing a small design-partner program.
Candidate under reviewHospital MRF · Version 3
In reviewexample_hospital_standardcharges.csv
Finding / next actionOwner
CMS validator output
ComplianceReview the file-header date
Confirm the candidate’s source date.
ClearCare supplemental
Revenue cycleClarify the plan mapping
Request evidence from the source team.
Publication workflow
IT / webConfirm the intended version
Record the hospital’s decision.
Hospital designation pendingExplore this example
One candidate file. Clear next actions. A traceable review.
Works beside your MRF generatorOfficial & supplemental findings stay distinctNo PHI in the initial scope
From findings to follow-through
The file is only part of the work.
After the checks come the questions: who owns the issue, which evidence resolves it, and which version did the hospital choose? ClearCare Readiness & Proof is being built to keep that work connected.
Move the question forward.
Connect a material finding to its basis, a named owner, supporting evidence and a next action.
Keep the decision record.
Follow reviewed corrections and the hospital’s publication decision. Include public-file comparison when agreed in scope.
Illustrative workflow · Synthetic data
Which plan does this rate belong to?
An outpatient MRI row has a negotiated amount, but its source mapping could refer to two different plans.
- Basis
- ClearCare supplemental review
- Owner
- Hospital revenue cycle team
- Next action
- Request source-mapping evidence.
Follow the review to a decision
The owner checks the mapping with the source team and file vendor. The reviewer compares the corrected candidate with that evidence and records the response and version.
The hospital decides whether to use the corrected file. The record retains the reasoning; ClearCare does not infer a new rate or make the publication decision.
The design-partner program
One real cycle.
A clearly agreed scope.
We’re preparing a proposed 30–60 day engagement for hospital teams with a publication cycle, remediation need, vendor transition or public-file concern.
We agree on timing, participants, supported files and success criteria before intake. The outline below is a proposed sequence, tailored after an initial fit review.
- 01 Days 0–5
Qualify & scope
Agree on the MRF event, team, file profile, no-PHI boundary and the decision the engagement should inform.
- 02 Days 5–15
Baseline & review
Review the candidate within the agreed coverage. Keep CMS validator output distinct from supplemental findings.
- 03 Days 10–35
Resolve & document
Route questions to owners, collect source evidence and vendor responses, and review supported corrections.
- 04 Days 30–60
Record & decide
Assemble the agreed review record and assess the cycle. The hospital retains publication and attestation decisions.
Fit comes before file intake.
We confirm file format, size and review coverage before each engagement. Large CSVs and nested JSON need an initial fit review. Unsupported areas are called out explicitly.
What your team works toward
A useful record.
For the next decision.
These are the proposed deliverables for a scoped engagement. We confirm what can be produced, the review coverage and any limitations before work begins.
Executive review brief
Material findings, owners, timing and the decision needed—along with coverage and unresolved questions.
Issue & evidence record
The basis for each issue, the source evidence, accountable owner and current disposition.
Change & decision history
The reviewed versions, supported corrections, responses and the hospital’s recorded decisions.
Publication review record
The hospital-designated file and, where agreed and supported, a dated observation of the publicly posted file.
The right people, around the same file.
A strong engagement brings together a named compliance or revenue-cycle owner, source-data and technical teams, an executive sponsor, and legal or vendor contributors where needed.
Clear boundaries
Confidence starts with clarity.
Independent technical observations and workflow support, with the hospital’s judgment at the center.
CMS guidance for hospitalsDoes ClearCare certify compliance?
No. ClearCare is not CMS approved or certified, does not provide legal opinions and does not guarantee compliance. CMS remains the authority. Your hospital retains its publication and attestation decisions.
Does it replace our MRF vendor?
No. The workbench is being developed to sit beside your generation vendor or internal pipeline. CMS-published validator output and ClearCare’s supplemental findings remain distinguishable.
What information is in scope?
The initial engagement is limited to MRFs and specifically agreed non-PHI evidence. Do not send patient information, confidential contracts or files through the inquiry channel. An appropriate intake process is agreed after qualification.
Can it change negotiated rates?
Economic truth stays with the hospital. ClearCare does not autonomously infer rates or create economic values. Any supported correction workflow is limited to agreed non-economic changes and hospital review.
Is this an open, self-service scan?
No. We’re preparing a guided design-partner program. File compatibility, coverage, security needs and expected deliverables are reviewed before an engagement or file intake begins.
Start with a conversation
What’s coming up in your MRF cycle?
Tell us about your workflow, the team involved and the next milestone. We’ll start with a conversation about fit and scope.
Email Richard about your workflowOpens your email app. Or write directly to
richard@clearcareplatform.com
Website privacy