Illustrative service sample
Example Specialty Group
Monthly independent executive revenue review.
This example demonstrates the breadth and format of a monthly review. All figures are fictional. Your practice receives a scope and measures suited to its specialty, structure and available data.
Executive view
August 2026 compared with July 2026. Example Specialty Group. All names, measures and figures in this sample are fictional.
| Measure | August | July | Movement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collections | $412,000 | $398,000 | +3.5% |
| Recorded cases | 1,840 | 1,790 | +2.8% |
| Denial-related write-offs | $12,800 | $9,600 | +33.3% |
Executive interpretation
Collections increased, while denial-related write-offs rose faster. Leadership should first validate the denial categories and determine whether the change reflects payer behavior, workflow or posting timing.
Collections and yield
Cash receipts and matched service cohorts answer different questions. Each measure keeps its timing and denominator visible.
| KPI | August | July | How to read it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ledger receipts | $412,000 | $398,000 | Payments posted in the month |
| Receipts per component unit | $19.99 | $20.40 | Ledger receipts divided by recorded component units; period context only |
| Matched 30-day gross collection rate | 45.0% | 43.0% | Payments within 30 days divided by gross charges for the same service cohort |
Illustrative August matched cohort: $108,000 collected within 30 days on $240,000 in gross charges. This is not a net collection rate or a percentage of all monthly ledger receipts.
Denials and write-offs
Review posted financial adjustments alongside the underlying reason detail. Reason counts and financial amounts should not be treated as interchangeable.
| Illustrative reason group | August write-offs | Next review |
|---|---|---|
| Authorization | $6,400 | Validate authorization workflow and payer requirements |
| Medical necessity | $3,600 | Review documentation and reason detail |
| Timely filing | $2,800 | Confirm filing evidence and posting dates |
| Total | $12,800 | Reconcile to the monthly ledger |
A write-off is not proof that a payer underpaid. Confirm the reason and supporting records before selecting an action.
Units and case mix
Measures are adapted to the specialty. This example uses an anesthesia-style unit view to illustrate the approach.
| Measure | August | July |
|---|---|---|
| Recorded cases | 1,840 | 1,790 |
| Component units | 20,608 | 19,511 |
| Average component units per case | 11.2 | 10.9 |
| Illustrative case group | August cases | Average units per case |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | 920 | 10.0 |
| Group B | 552 | 12.0 |
| Group C | 368 | 13.0 |
Case-group volumes total 1,840 and the weighted average is 11.2 units. Procedure and modifier detail would support interpretation in the practice-specific review.
Locations and entities
Compare like measures across the operating structure. Differences can reflect service mix, payer mix, timing or workflow.
| Illustrative location | Collections | Recorded cases |
|---|---|---|
| North location | $228,000 | 1,010 |
| South location | $184,000 | 830 |
| Practice total | $412,000 | 1,840 |
| Illustrative billing entity | Collections | Review context |
|---|---|---|
| Entity A | $310,000 | Reconcile entity assignment to source records |
| Entity B | $102,000 | Confirm transition and posting dates |
Location and entity are separate views of the same practice totals. These amounts should not be added together or interpreted as a net profitability ranking.
IDR and forecast
An optional module for a separately scoped engagement. Keep eligibility, dispute progress, awards, fees and collected payments distinct.
| Review area | What leadership sees |
|---|---|
| Eligibility | Which cases need a documented eligibility review |
| Stage tracking | Open negotiations, submissions and determinations, with dated source records |
| Award reconciliation | Determined amounts compared with actual payments |
| Scenario forecast | Explicit assumptions, fees, timing and sensitivity |
No recovery forecast is populated in this illustrative sample. Practice-specific assumptions and eligibility would be established before modeling potential cash flow.
KPI standards and data confidence
Definitions and readiness belong beside the measures. A precise-looking number should never conceal a missing denominator or an incomplete period.
| Measure | Definition / review limit | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Ledger receipts | Posted payments in the reporting period; reconcile to source ledger | Illustrative |
| Receipts per component unit | Period receipts / component units; not matched cohort yield | Context measure |
| Matched 30-day rate | Same-cohort payments within 30 days / gross charges | Defined in sample |
| Net collection rate | Requires validated collectible amounts and adjustment classifications | Not presented |
| Payer administration cost | Requires measured staff time and applicable fees | Not measured |
Targets are agreed for the practice. No industry benchmark or recovery guarantee is implied by these demonstration figures.
Executive actions
Every priority has an owner, evidence to review and a follow-up point.
| Priority | Responsible owner | Next step | Review point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validate denial increase | Revenue cycle lead | Reconcile $12,800 to reason detail and ledger | Next leadership review |
| Explain unit-yield movement | Executive analyst | Compare payer and service mix with the prior period | Next monthly refresh |
| Confirm entity reconciliation | Practice administrator | Check source entity mapping and transfer dates | Before next review |
| Agree on KPI readiness | Practice leadership | Confirm definitions, missing inputs and priority targets | Leadership review |
Rev IQ equips the practice and its advisors with analysis, priorities and oversight. The responsible teams carry out the agreed actions.