Why it matters

Mental health revenue leakage often looks simple until the payer checks provider taxonomy, license type, telehealth place of service, time documentation, psychotherapy add-ons, testing supervision, or collaborative-care consent and registry requirements.

Cleaner provider-specific billing
Fewer avoidable modifier and credentialing denials
Better support for mixed therapy and psychiatry groups
Workflow checks

Evidence to catch before work leaves the queue.

Operating workflow

Rules-first automation with human review where it counts.

Automation fit

Inspect the actual artifacts.

Foresight checks whether required evidence is present, whether records contradict each other, and whether the available facts look approvable under payer criteria before submission.

Completeness

Check for subscriber identifiers, active behavioral health benefit, rendering NPI/taxonomy, license type, supervision, diagnosis, procedure, pointer, treatment plan, time, modality, patient location, and prior auth where required.

Contradictions

Catch appointment-type and note mismatches such as therapy booked but E/M documented, 90837 with only 45 minutes, add-on psychotherapy without a primary E/M service, or telehealth POS/modifier rules copied from another payer.

Payer approvability

Apply payer carve-outs, visit limits, credentialing constraints, telehealth rules, testing-supervision requirements, and CoCM/BHI consent, registry, consultant-review, and monthly-minute thresholds before claim release.

Common leakage points

The work Foresight is built to surface early.

90791/90792, psychotherapy, and E/M services treated as interchangeable

Telehealth modifiers or POS rules applied globally instead of by payer

Psychotherapy add-ons missing separately identifiable documentation

Testing or collaborative-care claims missing supervision, consent, registry, or time evidence

Workflow risk audit

Map the risk surface.

A useful audit scores concrete workflow gaps: missing evidence, contradictory records, payer criteria risk, and follow-through after submission.

Required evidence present

Whether the claim, PA, or appeal has the basic identifiers and clinical anchors needed before work leaves the queue.

Chart contradictions

Where the EHR, notes, questionnaire, inventory, pharmacy response, and billing record point to different answers.

Payer approvability

Whether the available evidence appears to satisfy payer criteria before the submission creates AR or appeal work.

Follow-through

Whether approvals, denials, paper EOBs, portal messages, corrected claims, and deposits resolve cleanly after submission.

Psych / psych

See how Foresight would inspect this workflow.

Book demo