, August 12, 2002 6:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; William J. Kammerer
Subject: RE: 276 routing question, esp. interested in Clearinghouse
guru's opinion
Kepa's response raises an interesting question, and one which I have been
contemplating for some time - would a Plan
/inaccurate/unusable CPP.
Rachel Foerster
-Original Message-
From: Dave Minch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; William J. Kammerer
Subject: RE: 276 routing question, esp. interested in Clearinghouse
guru's opinion
. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 5:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: 276 routing question, esp. interested in Clearinghouse
guru's opinion
Rachel,
If I'm understanding this correctly, the use-case for the provider is
Payor system
Kepa's response raises an interesting question, and one which I have been
contemplating for some time - would a Plan, Provider, or CH (or other third
party) want to post multiple CPPs based on the usage? In other words,
there's 3 collaboration agreements and potentially 6 CPPs implied in Kepa's
43221-3859
+1 (614) 487-0320
- Original Message -
From: Michael Mattias/Tal Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 06 August, 2002 08:27 PM
Subject: Re: 276 routing question, esp. interested in Clearinghouse
guru's opinion
- Original
