Follow-up that happens when someone remembers
Ad hoc chasing means the loudest or easiest claims get worked and the rest age. A cadence removes the judgment call from the scheduling and puts it into the prioritization instead.
Accounts receivable does not age because claims are complicated. It ages because nobody has a schedule. Rev Cura works receivables on a defined cadence by payer and aging bucket, with a documented touchpoint history on every open claim.
Accounts receivable follow-up is the scheduled pursuit of claims that have been submitted but not paid. Work is segmented by payer, aging bucket and value, each with a defined cadence, and every contact is documented so the next call builds on the last.
That history matters as much as the follow-up itself. It is what turns "we have chased them" into a record of who was called, on what date, what the payer said, what was agreed and when it will be checked again — which is also what makes the next call effective rather than a fresh start.
Follow-up is also where a practice finds out what is genuinely collectable. Some of an aged balance will be recovered, some needs one correction, and some should have been closed a long time ago. Treating all three the same is why backlogs stay still.
Ad hoc chasing means the loudest or easiest claims get worked and the rest age. A cadence removes the judgment call from the scheduling and puts it into the prioritization instead.
Without a touchpoint history, every call restarts the conversation, and a payer representative who promised a reprocess three weeks ago has no reason to remember it.
Effort should be proportional to what is recoverable. Working a small balance with the same intensity as a large one is a choice to under-work the large one.
A claim that has been "in process" for two months does not need a fourth status call; it needs escalation through the payer's own channels with the history to support it.
Uncollectable balances carried on the books inflate AR and make every aging report harder to read than it needs to be.
Open AR is segmented by payer, aging bucket and value so effort is directed where recovery is realistic, and so the reporting reflects the shape of the problem.
Each segment is given a defined follow-up rhythm — how often it is worked and through which channel — rather than being chased opportunistically.
Every touchpoint is recorded: date, contact, payer response, next action and next review date. The history travels with the claim.
Claims that stall despite correct follow-up are escalated through payer channels, supported by the documented history rather than by repetition.
Where a balance is genuinely unrecoverable it is closed with a documented reason, so the AR figure means something.
AR aging, days in AR and movement between buckets, reported on an agreed rhythm — including where the balance is not moving.
By payer, bucket and value, so priorities are explicit rather than implied.
On every open claim, available to you, not held in a black box.
What moved between buckets, what was collected and what stood still.
An honest split of the balance into recoverable, correctable and closeable.
Agreed at the start of the engagement, reported on a fixed rhythm, with commentary rather than a raw export.
We report your figures. We do not publish benchmark numbers we cannot evidence for your practice.
Patient balance handling is agreed with you in advance, including tone and escalation limits. Many practices keep patient-facing collections in-house, and that is a perfectly reasonable choice.
We do not act as a collections agency and we do not pursue patients beyond the limits you set in writing.
Where a balance is unrecoverable we will say so. Continuing to bill you for chasing it would be the easy option and the wrong one.
As far back as timely filing and payer rules allow. Where a claim is genuinely unrecoverable we will tell you rather than bill you for chasing it.
No. Follow-up is the ongoing cadence on current receivables. Cleanup is a defined project on an aged backlog, run separately so it does not compete with current-month work.
Only if you ask us to, and only within limits agreed in writing first. Many practices keep this in-house.
That depends on the age and composition of the balance and on payer behavior. We report movement between aging buckets every period so you can see the trend rather than take a promise on trust.
The documented history is what makes escalation possible — through the payer's own escalation channels, and where appropriate through the routes available for unresolved claims.
No. Closing a balance as uncollectable follows the rules we agree with you, and every closure carries a documented reason.
Project work on aged, stalled and written-off claims.
Explore →Root-cause categorization, appeals and prevention loops.
Explore →ERA and manual posting with reconciliation and variance review.
Explore →Speak with our team about your current billing workflow, AR challenges and revenue cycle goals.