Medical Billing Audit Services
A billing audit answers what your monthly reports cannot: where revenue is leaking, which claims were paid below contract, and which patterns carry compliance risk. Two engagements, kept separate — a free screening that uses data you already have, and a scoped paid audit that reviews charts.
- Free audit
- No contract
- HIPAA-secure
- Cancel anytime
What Is a Medical Billing Audit?
A medical billing audit is a structured review of coding accuracy, payer payment reconciliation, compliance posture and revenue cycle leakage. MedPrecision runs it as two separate engagements. The free screening reads a 12-month export from your practice management system and returns a short written memo in five business days — no chart access, no coding opinion, no extrapolated dollar figure. The paid audit adds chart review and covers four types: coding accuracy against the clinical documentation, payment accuracy against your contracted fee schedules and the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, compliance review against HHS-OIG guidance and payer medical policy, and end-to-end revenue leakage. Every paid audit publishes its sample size, how the sample was stratified, and whether that sample supports extrapolating a dollar figure to the full population — because at typical review volumes it usually does not.
- Free screening and paid audit are separate engagements — the free one uses data you already have and never reviews a chart
- Named input list and named deliverable list, both published on this page before you ask for a quote
- Sample size, stratification and extrapolation limits stated in the report rather than implied
- Fixed fee agreed before kickoff, set by sample size and the number of payers and audit types in scope
Whether you are preparing for a payer audit, concerned about compliance, or simply want to know why collections are not where they should be, an audit gives you evidence instead of an impression. We keep two things apart, because collapsing them is how "free audit" offers end up meaning nothing. The free screening costs nothing, needs no chart access and takes five business days. You send a 12-month export from your practice management system — charges, payments, adjustments, denial and remittance detail, A/R aging — and you get back a short memo naming where the money is sitting, which denial reasons repeat, which payers pay slowest, and whether a paid audit would be worth the fee. It contains no coding opinion, no chart review and no extrapolated dollar estimate, because the data behind it cannot support any of those. The paid audit is a scoped engagement with a stated sample, a named input list, a written report and a remediation plan, priced as a fixed fee agreed before kickoff and driven by sample size and how many payers and audit types are in scope. Below is exactly what we need from you and exactly what you get back.
Who This Service Is For
The State of Medical Billing Audit Services in 2026
HHS-OIG's Work Plan is the public statement of what federal auditors are examining, and it is a living web document that OIG adjusts through the year rather than an annual edition — calling it "the 2025 Work Plan" dates a page the moment it is published, so this one does not. On the size of the federal exposure: CMS reported a fiscal year 2025 Medicare fee-for-service improper payment rate of 6.55 percent, representing $28.83 billion, measured over claims submitted between July 2023 and June 2024 (CMS Comprehensive Error Rate Testing, verified 17 September 2026). Read that figure for what it is: an improper payment is a claim that did not meet Medicare coverage, coding or documentation requirements in either direction, which is not the same thing as fraud and is not a practice-level error rate. Four figures this page used to carry have been removed rather than re-sourced, because each was attributed to a body that does not publish it freely or at all: an industry coding-accuracy average, a commercial-payer underpayment percentage, a collection-rate advantage for practices that audit annually, and a reduction in payer audit exposure for practices running compliance programs. The sourcing behind every benchmark we do publish is on our benchmarks page, and where a number does not exist in public this site states the blank instead of relaying one.
What Is Breaking Right Now
Unknown compliance risks that could trigger payer audits or OIG investigations
Systematic under-coding or over-coding patterns that affect revenue and compliance
Payer underpayments that go undetected without contract-to-payment comparison
Inability to identify the root causes of declining financial performance
Common Medical Billing Audit Services Mistakes to Avoid
Conducting coding audits without comparing to clinical documentation
Checking whether a code is valid is not the same as checking whether it is accurate. A valid ICD-10 code that does not match the clinical documentation creates both compliance risk and revenue impact.
Every audit encounter should be reviewed against the full clinical documentation including progress notes, lab results, and imaging reports to validate code accuracy and specificity.
Auditing only when a problem is suspected rather than on a regular schedule
By the time a billing problem is obvious enough to trigger an audit, it has likely been occurring for months or years. The cumulative financial and compliance impact far exceeds what a proactive audit would have caught early.
Conduct annual audits and quarterly targeted audits focused on high-risk areas, new providers, and recently changed payer rules.
Not quantifying the financial impact of audit findings
Without dollar amounts attached to each finding, practice leadership cannot prioritize remediation efforts or justify the investment in corrective actions. Findings without financial context are often ignored.
Attach a dollar figure to every finding from the sampled encounters themselves, and state plainly whether the sample supports projecting that figure onto the full population. Present findings as recoverable revenue opportunities with the measurement method shown, rather than as bare error rates.
Failing to act on audit findings with specific corrective measures
An audit that identifies problems but does not result in specific process changes is wasted effort. The same errors will continue, and the next audit will find the same issues.
Translate every audit finding into a specific corrective action with an assigned owner, implementation deadline, and success metric. Track corrective action completion and validate effectiveness through follow-up audits.
What We Handle
Coding Accuracy Audits
Statistically valid sample review of coded encounters to measure accuracy rates, identify systematic coding errors, and quantify the revenue impact of under-coding or over-coding.
Payment Accuracy Audits
Comparison of payer payments against contracted rates to identify underpayments, incorrect adjustments, and contractual compliance issues across your payer portfolio.
Compliance Risk Assessments
Review of billing practices against OIG compliance guidance, False Claims Act requirements, and payer-specific rules to identify and remediate compliance risks.
Revenue Leakage Analysis
End-to-end analysis of your revenue cycle from charge capture through collections to identify every point where revenue is being lost.
Documentation Improvement Recommendations
Provider-specific feedback on documentation patterns that are limiting coding levels or creating compliance risk with actionable improvement guidance.
Free Billing Audit · No obligation
Get a Free Billing Audit
Our billing audit uncovers the specific issues costing your practice money — coding errors, underpayments, missed charges, and process breakdowns. No generic reports, just actionable findings.
Prefer to talk? Book a 15-minute callRequest received
A billing specialist will review your practice details and reach out within 1 business day. No confirmation email is sent — if you need to reach us sooner, call +1-872-297-2815.
Our Medical Billing Audit Services Methodology
Statistically Valid Sample Design
Samples are stratified by provider, payer, service type and CPT family so a finding is attributable rather than anecdotal. The report states the sample size, how it was drawn and whether it supports projecting a dollar figure onto the full population — a 100-150 encounter probe detects and ranks error patterns but does not reach the roughly 357-382 encounters an extrapolation at 95% confidence and a 5% margin would require at typical practice volumes.
Multi-Dimensional Coding Review
Each encounter is reviewed against the clinical documentation for ICD-10 specificity, CPT code accuracy, E/M level support, modifier appropriateness, and diagnosis-procedure linkage. We do not simply check if the code is valid -- we determine if it is the most accurate and complete code supported by the documentation.
Contract-to-Payment Reconciliation
We model expected payments based on your payer contracts and compare them against actual payments received, line by line. This identifies systematic underpayments, incorrect fee schedule applications, and contractual adjustment errors that are invisible in standard financial reports.
Compliance Risk Scoring
Each finding is scored on a compliance risk scale that considers the financial impact, the regulatory exposure, and the likelihood of external audit scrutiny. This prioritization ensures your remediation efforts focus on the highest-risk issues first, whether that means potential False Claims Act exposure or OIG work plan targets.
Actionable Remediation Roadmap
Findings become a remediation plan: provider-level education, process changes, payer appeal actions and compliance corrections, each with a named owner and a date. Every item carries the dollars actually found in the sample, labelled as such, so you can see what was measured rather than what was projected.
Medical Billing Audit Services: MedPrecision vs Alternatives
| Feature | MedPrecision | In-House | Other Providers |
|---|---|---|---|
| Audit Methodology | Stratified sample with the size, method and extrapolation limits stated in the report | Convenience sampling of readily available charts | Random sampling without statistical validity assurance |
| Coding Review Depth | Multi-dimensional review covering ICD-10, CPT, E/M, modifiers, and HCC capture | Basic code validation without documentation comparison | Code accuracy review with limited modifier and HCC analysis |
| Payment Accuracy Analysis | Line-level payment-to-contract comparison across all payers | High-level collection rate review without contract modeling | Sample-based payment review for top payers only |
| Compliance Assessment | Risk-scored findings aligned with OIG work plan priorities | General compliance checklist without risk prioritization | Standard compliance review without regulatory risk scoring |
| Deliverable Quality | Findings with the sampled dollars attached, per-provider scorecards, a payment variance schedule and a remediation plan with owners and dates | Observations without financial quantification | Findings report with general recommendations |
| Provider Education | Individual provider scorecards with specific documentation improvement guidance | Group-level feedback without provider-specific analysis | General coding education recommendations |
“The practices that treat an audit as a compliance obligation get a compliance document. The ones that treat it as a measurement get three things they can act on this quarter: a list of specific claims to rework, a list of contract lines being paid below their own terms, and the process change that stops producing them.”
MedPrecision Billing Team
Chief Compliance and Audit Officer
How the Transition Works
How we deliver medical billing audit services for your practice.
Audit Scope & Methodology Design
We define scope, agree which of the four audit types are in play, and set the sample: how many encounters, how they are stratified, and whether the sample is sized to detect patterns or to support extrapolation. The fee is fixed at this point.
Data Collection & Review
We work from a named input list: read-only PM or EHR access, the encounter-level export for the audit period (provider, payer, date of service, CPT/HCPCS, ICD-10-CM, charge, allowed, paid, adjustment), the clinical documentation for the sampled encounters, your contracted fee schedules for the payers in scope, your charge master, the 835 remittance files for the period, and your current superbill templates and scrubber edit list.
Analysis & Financial Impact Quantification
Findings are analyzed to identify patterns, quantify financial impact, assess compliance risk levels, and prioritize issues by both severity and recoverability.
Report Delivery & Remediation Planning
You receive the written report, the per-provider scorecards, the payment variance schedule and the remediation plan, plus the sample file itself so every finding can be reproduced against your own data. We present it and agree owners and dates.
What Reporting and Visibility Looks Like
Transparency is built into every engagement. You will always know where your revenue stands and what actions are being taken on your behalf.
Monthly KPI Dashboards
Track collection rates, denial trends, days in A/R, and payer-level performance with dashboards delivered on a fixed schedule.
Real-Time Claim Tracking
See claim status updates in real time so you never have to wonder where a payment stands or when follow-up is happening.
Quarterly Business Reviews
Detailed reviews with actionable recommendations covering denial root causes, payer trends, and revenue recovery opportunities.
Proactive Alerts
Automated alerts when key metrics shift, so issues are caught and addressed before they affect your bottom line.
Medical Billing Audit Services Key Terms
- Coding Accuracy Rate
- The share of reviewed encounters where the assigned codes are supported by the clinical documentation. No free primary source publishes a physician-practice target for this metric, so the threshold is set per engagement against your own baseline and specialty rather than against a quoted industry number.
- E/M Level Distribution
- The percentage of office visits coded at each E/M level (99211-99215 for established patients, 99202-99205 for new patients). Compared against specialty norms to identify under-coding or over-coding patterns.
- Extrapolation
- A statistical method for projecting audit findings from a sample onto the full population of claims. It is only valid when the sample was sized for it: a detection-sized probe of 100-150 charts does not support extrapolation, and a report that does it anyway is claiming precision it has not bought.
- OIG Work Plan
- HHS-OIG's published statement of the healthcare billing and compliance areas receiving audit and evaluation attention. It is maintained as a continuously updated web document, adjusted through the year, rather than as a fixed annual edition.
- HCC Capture Rate
- The percentage of documented hierarchical condition category diagnoses that are correctly coded and reported. Directly impacts risk-adjusted payments in Medicare Advantage and value-based contracts.
- False Claims Act
- Federal law imposing liability for knowingly submitting false claims to the government, including Medicare and Medicaid claims. Remedies include treble damages plus an inflation-adjusted civil penalty per false claim — $14,308 to $28,619 for penalties assessed after 3 July 2025 under 28 CFR 85.5.
Common Questions
Common questions about medical billing audit services.
Get a Free Billing Audit
See where denials, follow-up delays, or workflow gaps may be hurting your collections.
Get a Free Billing AuditWhat types of billing audits do you offer?
The free screening is one thing and the paid audit is four. Free screening: a read of your 12-month practice management export — charge, payment, adjustment, denial and A/R aging data — returning a short memo on where revenue is sitting, which denial reasons repeat, and whether a paid audit is worth commissioning. No chart access, no coding opinion, no dollar estimate projected to the full population. Paid audits fall into four functional categories: (1) coding accuracy audits comparing the assigned ICD-10-CM and CPT codes against the clinical documentation for each sampled encounter; (2) payment accuracy audits reconciling actual payer payments line by line against your contracted fee schedules and, for Medicare, the published Physician Fee Schedule amount, producing a variance schedule rather than a percentage; (3) compliance audits against HHS-OIG guidance, the False Claims Act at 31 U.S.C. 3729 and payer medical policy, focused on office and outpatient evaluation and management levels, modifier 25 usage, telehealth billing and incident-to billing; and (4) full revenue cycle audits covering registration through collections. HHS-OIG maintains its Work Plan as a continuously updated web document rather than an annual edition, so scope is set against the Work Plan as it reads at kickoff and the report says on what date it was checked.
How many records do you review in a billing audit?
Most audits review 50-200 encounters stratified by provider, payer, service type and CPT family. What matters more than the count is being honest about what a sample that size can and cannot support, because this is where audit reports most often overclaim. A sample sized for extrapolation is much larger than a sample sized for detection. At 95% confidence and a 5% margin of error, with no prior assumption about the error rate, the standard formula n = (Z^2 x p x (1-p)) / E^2 gives 1.96^2 x 0.25 / 0.05^2 = 384 encounters before any adjustment for population size. Applying the finite-population correction, a practice with 5,000 annual encounters still needs about 357, and one with 50,000 needs about 382. A 100-150 chart review does not reach that, and any report that extrapolates a dollar figure from one is presenting a precision it does not have. So we scope it in two tiers and say which you are buying. A probe sample of 100-150 encounters, stratified as above, is sized to detect and rank error patterns — it will reliably tell you that modifier 25 is being applied inconsistently, or that one provider's documentation does not support the level billed, and it will quantify the dollars found inside the sample itself. It is not sized to project those dollars onto your full population, and our reports say so in the methodology section. An extrapolation sample is sized from the formula above against your actual encounter volume and error expectation, costs more because it is two to three times the chart review, and is what we scope when the purpose is quantifying an exposure or supporting a refund calculation rather than finding the problem. Targeted audits narrowed to a single CPT code or a single payer are sized for representativeness within that subgroup, and the report states the subgroup rather than implying the finding generalises.
What if the audit finds compliance issues?
The sequence is: document the finding with the specific encounters behind it, correct the process and re-educate the providers involved, decide whether the issue is self-disclosable, and return anything that turns out to be an overpayment. Three points where published billing content is commonly wrong or out of date: The return deadline is not simply "60 days from when you find it." For Medicare Parts A and B, 42 CFR 401.305 requires an identified overpayment to be reported and returned by the later of 60 days after the date it was identified or the date any corresponding cost report is due, with a six-year lookback from the date the overpayment was received. Commercial payers and state Medicaid programs set their own refund and recoupment windows in contract or in state law; the federal rule does not govern them. False Claims Act penalties are inflation-adjusted and move every year. Under 28 CFR 85.5, for penalties assessed after 3 July 2025 a violation of 31 U.S.C. 3729 carries a civil penalty of $14,308 to $28,619 per false claim, in addition to treble damages. The lower ranges still circulating in billing content are superseded adjustment tables. Verified against the current eCFR text on 17 September 2026. The OIG framework has two layers. HHS-OIG published a General Compliance Program Guidance in November 2023, and its 2000 Compliance Program Guidance for Individual and Small Group Physician Practices (65 FR 59434) remains available as a risk-area resource. OIG also operates a Self-Disclosure Protocol for providers that choose to disclose. One limit worth stating plainly: MedPrecision is not a law firm. Nothing in an audit report is a legal opinion, and we make no representation that privilege attaches to it. Whether a finding warrants self-disclosure, and how the work should be structured to preserve any privilege, are questions for your own counsel — we deliver findings, evidence and corrective actions, and we deliver them to counsel at your direction.
How often should we conduct a billing audit?
Annually for a full audit covering coding accuracy, payment accuracy and compliance, with shorter targeted audits in between on whatever the last audit flagged. That cadence is what HHS-OIG itself recommends: its Compliance Program Guidance for Individual and Small Group Physician Practices (65 FR 59434, 5 October 2000) says that after a baseline audit, periodic audits should be run at least once each year to confirm the compliance program is being followed, and that there is no set formula for how many records to review. Read it as what it is — a voluntary guidance recommendation, not a frequency anyone has measured an optimal value for. Verified against the Federal Register text on 17 September 2026. Audit more often when there is a specific reason to: a new provider (audit within 90 days of their start date), a change of EHR or practice management system, a specialty that HHS-OIG's Work Plan is currently examining, Medicare Advantage risk-adjusted contracts where HCC capture drives payment, meaningful telehealth volume, or a denial rate drifting out of the range the American Academy of Family Physicians publishes as guidance — AAFP states that a 5% to 10% denial rate is the industry average and that keeping it below 5% is more desirable. That AAFP figure is practice-management guidance with no published population, sample or data year behind it, which is why we quote it as a target rather than as a measurement. The claims this answer used to make — that practices auditing annually collect several percentage points more, and that practices with compliance programs face materially fewer payer audit recovery demands — were attributed to bodies that do not publish them. They have been removed rather than re-sourced.
Do you support compliance programs and fraud, waste, and abuse (FWA) training?
Yes. Beyond claim and coding audits we help build the compliance infrastructure payers and regulators expect: a written compliance plan, policies and procedures, and fraud, waste and abuse training. The seven core requirements this maps to are set out at 42 CFR 422.503 for Medicare Advantage, with a parallel Part D provision at 42 CFR 423.504 — written policies and standards of conduct, a compliance officer and committee, training and education, effective lines of communication, well-publicized disciplinary standards, routine monitoring and auditing, and prompt response and correction. Read the scope carefully, because it is routinely overstated: those requirements bind the plan sponsor, and they reach a practice or a billing vendor through first tier, downstream and related entity contract terms rather than applying directly. HHS-OIG's General Compliance Program Guidance (November 2023) is the current OIG-published general framework. Verified against the current eCFR text on 17 September 2026. We also support HHS-OIG exclusion list and SAM exclusion monitoring so you are not billing for services tied to an excluded individual, and we assist with payer and Medicare audit responses and overpayment investigations when they arise.
Related Services
Specialties We Serve
Related Resources
Get a Free Billing Audit
Our billing audit uncovers the specific issues costing your practice money — coding errors, underpayments, missed charges, and process breakdowns. No generic reports, just actionable findings.
- No contract
- No setup fees
- Reply within 1 business day