ClearCare is a hospital price-transparency compliance-operations workbench preparing for a limited design-partner program. It works beside your MRF vendor or internal pipeline to review the candidate file, focus the team on material blockers and owners, and preserve the record behind publication.
Independent of your generation vendor. Official and supplemental findings stay distinct. No PHI in the initial scope.
Illustrative views use synthetic representative data. Each design-partner engagement runs on the hospital's real candidate file only within the documented support envelope.
Material findings stay connected to a basis, an owner, and a next action.
The publication version changes only through an explicit, recorded hospital decision.
Compare the reviewed artifact with what is publicly posted at a specific time, when supported.
A validator can flag technical findings. It does not assign owners, collect evidence, document hospital decisions, or confirm that the public file is the version your team reviewed. ClearCare is being prepared as the independent operating layer around your existing generation process.
An accountable team should be able to answer three questions at any point in the cycle:
File identity and lineage stay clear from intake through hospital designation and public observation.
Findings connect to accountable owners, source-data needs, and a concrete next step.
The record supports executive, compliance, legal, vendor, and technical review without implying certification.
Findings without owners. Technical output lands in spreadsheets, but ownership and the next action remain unclear.
Coordination by email. Compliance, revenue cycle, IT, counsel, and vendors work from different versions of the truth.
The record is rebuilt after the fact. Candidate files, corrections, decisions, and the public file are hard to connect once the cycle closes.
Blockers routed to owners. Official validator output and ClearCare supplemental review stay distinct and connect to a next step.
One shared operating record. Hospital teams and approved contributors coordinate around scoped work and supporting evidence.
A governed record through publication. Source preservation, hospital decisions, and public observation remain connected within supported scope.
Not an open self-service scan. A fixed-scope, no-PHI design-partner engagement with named participants, explicit gates, and a decision at the end. Qualification happens before any file is submitted.
Confirm the trigger, participants, file envelope, no-PHI boundary, and success criteria before any file is submitted.
Controlled intake of the candidate file, followed by a readiness review with official and supplemental findings kept distinct.
Route blockers to owners and work through source-data questions, vendor loops, and supported non-economic changes.
The hospital selects its intended artifact. When included in scope, ClearCare records public observation before the engagement is scored.
The engagement ends with measured evidence about finding accuracy, adoption, operating value, support burden, and whether ClearCare belongs in the hospital's next MRF cycle.
Four deliverables tailored to the confirmed scope, built to support hospital decisions, counsel review, and vendor coordination.
Top blockers, owners, timing, coverage, and the primary decision required in a concise, forwardable view.
Material root causes with official or supplemental basis, ownership, evidence, and current status.
Supported previews, hospital decisions, resulting artifacts, and re-review outcomes within confirmed scope.
The hospital-designated version, any supported public observation, and the record's explicit limitations.
The strongest engagements include the people who own source truth, publication, counsel boundaries, and the budget decision. Approved vendors and advisors participate only through scoped access.
What is the readiness basis, and what record supports our decision?
Official and supplemental findings stay distinct, with blockers, limitations, and proof visible.
Which findings need source truth, vendor action, or a hospital decision?
Payer, plan, and code context with coordinated evidence and no unsafe economic inference.
Which artifact was reviewed, and what was actually published?
Candidate and public file identity, bounded no-PHI handling, and scoped publication observation.
What decision is required, and what are the limitations?
A concise blocker-and-owner view with explicit claims boundaries and measured pilot criteria.
These constraints are part of the offer, not fine print added after intake.
CMS remains the authority. ClearCare may organize and compare official validator output; it is not CMS approved or certified.
No legal certification. Readiness states and proof packages support review; they are not legal opinions or compliance guarantees.
No PHI in the initial scope. The first engagement is limited to MRFs and specifically agreed non-PHI evidence.
Economic truth stays with the hospital. ClearCare does not autonomously infer rates or create economic values.
Only supported safe changes. Any change workflow is limited to documented non-economic families within the confirmed support envelope.
The hospital designates the artifact. ClearCare records the hospital's decision; it does not approve a file for publication.
A limited number of guided engagements for hospital teams with a real trigger: a publication cycle, remediation need, vendor transition, public-file concern, or audit-readiness requirement.
A hospital or health system with a current or upcoming MRF cycle, a named compliance or revenue-cycle owner, access to technical and source-data stakeholders, and no immediate PHI requirement.
We discuss your trigger, current process, file and facility profile, participants, security needs, and success criteria. Secure intake is arranged only after scope and data handling are agreed.