SOLUTIONS · PHYSICIAN GROUPS
Healthcare
Multi-location physician group reporting means one set of numbers for every site, provider and payer, even when the sites run different EHR and practice management systems. It is built for the CEO, CFO and COO of a multi-site physician group or MSO, usually after a few acquisitions left athenahealth at some clinics, eClinicalWorks or NextGen at others, and a separate payroll system and general ledger behind all of them. The answer is not to wait for one EHR. OutcomeCatalyst connects the systems you already run, agrees one definition for each metric with your finance team, and delivers site-level reporting on wRVUs, payer mix, collections, days in A/R and scheduling utilization that your leaders can sign off on.
The site report that takes until Thursday
You have fifteen locations. Nine came with the practices you bought. The board deck asks a simple question: which sites are pulling their weight?
Your analyst exports from three PM systems, pastes into a workbook that one person understands, maps payer names by hand, and pulls provider cost from payroll. By Thursday there is a number. By Friday a site director says her collections are wrong because half her payments were posted to the billing office location.
That is the problem in the words we hear: we can't get one report across our clinics, every system defines A/R differently, I don't trust provider productivity until finance rebuilds it. It is common, because the market keeps consolidating. As of January 1, 2026, 82.0% of US physicians were employed by hospitals or corporate entities, and corporate entities owned 33.2% of physician practices, more than hospitals at 30.6% (Physicians Advocacy Institute and Avalere Health, 2026). Each acquisition brings its own systems and its own habits. And the workarounds pile up: in a July 2026 poll, three out of four medical groups said clinicians frequently (43%) or sometimes (32%) use workarounds for EHR or PM system issues, including separate tracking spreadsheets (MGMA Stat, 2026).
Why "move everyone to one EHR" is a multi-year answer
Standardizing on one EHR may be the right long-term call. It is a poor plan for next quarter's board meeting.
A conversion is done site by site. Each clinic needs templates rebuilt, interfaces to labs and imaging redone, providers retrained, and a stretch of lower schedules while everyone learns the new screens. Historical claims and A/R usually stay in the old system until they are worked down, so you report across two systems at that site anyway. Vendor contracts have their own end dates. And if you are still acquiring, every new practice resets the count.
So the honest sequence is this: get one trusted view across the systems you have now, then decide on EHR consolidation with real site-level numbers in hand. Reporting should not wait on a migration that might take years. We think groups that make it wait end up making acquisition and staffing calls on numbers they already distrust.
The five numbers, and why each one breaks across systems
Metric | What leadership asks | Why the systems disagree |
|---|---|---|
Provider productivity (wRVUs) | Who is producing, and is comp lined up with it? | Systems load RVU values from different fee schedule years, apply modifiers differently, and credit split or supervised visits to different providers. CMS cut work RVUs by 2.5% for nearly all non-time-based codes starting January 1, 2026 (CMS CY 2026 Physician Fee Schedule final rule, 2025), so a system still on 2025 values overstates productivity. |
Payer mix | How exposed is each site to Medicare, Medicaid and each commercial plan? | The same payer appears under dozens of names and plan IDs. One system reports mix by charges, another by visits, another by payments. |
Collections by site | Which locations convert visits into cash? | Payments post to a billing office, a rendering location or a place of service, depending on how each PM was set up. Payroll and the GL use their own cost center codes. |
Days in A/R | How fast do we get paid, and where is it stuck? | Gross or net of contractual adjustments, credit balances in or out, aging from date of service or claim date, and a different averaging window in each system. |
Scheduling utilization | Are our providers' slots full? | Templates, blocked time, overbooks and no-shows are recorded differently, so "utilization" in one EHR is not the same ratio in the next. |
Normalizing definitions is the real work
Most reporting projects stall here, not on connections. Someone has to decide whether days in A/R is net of contractuals, which location a telehealth visit belongs to, and how a supervised APP visit is credited. Those are finance and operations decisions, and they usually live in one controller's head.
OC writes them down with your CFO and COO as a short data dictionary: one definition per metric, then the mapping from each source system to that definition. Payer names roll up to one payer list. Locations from the PM, payroll departments and GL cost centers roll up to one site list. Where a system cannot produce the agreed number, the report says so instead of guessing.
That dictionary becomes part of the context layer we call the brain, a knowledge graph that links each claim, payment, provider and site across systems. Our post on data unification and the intelligence layer explains why we connect live systems this way rather than copying everything into a new warehouse.
What OutcomeCatalyst does, step by step
Maps what you have. We list every EHR, PM, clearinghouse, payroll and accounting system by site, plus the spreadsheets people actually use to close the month.
Agrees the definitions. A working session with finance and operations sets the definitions for wRVUs, payer mix, collections, days in A/R and utilization. We bring the questions; you make the calls.
Connects and reconciles. OC connects each system into the governed context layer and maps providers, payers, locations and cost centers to one list each. The first output is a reconciliation: our numbers next to the ones your team reports today, with every gap explained.
Delivers the site report. Site, provider and payer views on the agreed definitions, refreshed on the cadence you choose. Leaders can ask follow-up questions in plain English, such as "why did days in A/R jump at the north clinic," and get the claims and payers behind the answer.
Flags what changed. The agent watches for shifts worth a look: a provider's wRVUs dropping after a template change, a payer's denials rising at one site, collections lagging visits. Denied claims can feed our claims and appeals agent, and cost per procedure by site ties into procedure economics.
Keeps it running. When you buy the next practice, it gets mapped into the same definitions. OC does that work; your team reviews it.
The systems it reads
EHR and practice management: the ones you run, which in acquired groups often means a mix such as athenahealth, eClinicalWorks, NextGen, ModMed or Epic. We confirm the access method for each on the first call.
Billing and clearinghouse data: charges, claims, remittances and denial codes.
Payroll and HR: provider and staff cost by site and department.
General ledger: site P&L and cost centers, so revenue and cost meet on the same site list.
Payer contracts and fee schedules, where you keep them, to compare what was paid with what was expected.
Spreadsheets that carry real decisions, such as comp plans and provider start dates.
Your systems stay the systems of record.
What stays human
Your CFO owns the definitions. Your site leaders review the flags and decide what to do about them. Compensation decisions, provider conversations, staffing changes and any change to a payer contract stay with your people. The agent assembles the evidence and drafts the explanation; your team approves it before it goes into a board deck or a provider meeting.
What to measure
Pick the unit before the build. For this work the unit is the site-month report: one location's wRVUs, payer mix, collections, days in A/R and utilization for one month, on the agreed definitions, signed off by finance.
Business days from month end to a signed-off site-month report for every location.
Analyst hours spent per month rebuilding reports by hand.
Number of metric disputes raised by site leaders per month, and how many were settled with evidence.
Variance flags raised by the agent, and how many led to an action, such as a recovered underpayment or a fixed template.
How a project starts
It starts with a strategy call. Bring a recent board or operating report and a list of the systems at each site. We will tell you which metrics we would start with, which definitions look disputed, and what access we would need. If OC is not a fit, for example if you are a single-EHR group whose vendor analytics already answer these questions, we will say that.
From there OC scopes a first phase around a handful of sites and one or two metrics, delivers the reconciliation, and expands once your finance team trusts the numbers. OC delivers and runs the work. If you are weighing doing it in-house, our buy vs build guide lays out the trade-offs.
Frequently asked questions
How do we get one report across 15 clinic locations on different EHRs?
Connect each EHR and PM system, plus payroll and the general ledger, into one layer, then map providers, payers, locations and cost centers to a single list each. The step most groups skip is agreeing one definition per metric with finance first. Without that, a combined report just adds up numbers that mean different things.
Can it connect to athenahealth, eClinicalWorks, NextGen, ModMed or Epic?
We work with the systems you already run rather than asking you to replace them. Access varies by vendor, version and contract, so on the first call we look at each system you have and tell you plainly how we would connect to it before any work starts.
Do we need a data team to run this?
No. OC builds the connections, writes the definitions with your finance team, and runs the reporting and the agent. Your team approves definitions, reviews flags and decides what to act on.
Do you copy our data into a new warehouse?
No. The agent reads from your existing systems through a governed context layer. Your EHR, PM, payroll and GL remain the systems of record.
We plan to move everyone to one EHR. Should we wait?
We would not. Conversions go site by site, old A/R stays in the old system until it is worked down, and acquisitions keep adding new systems. A single view now also gives you the site-level numbers to plan the conversion order. When a site converts, it gets remapped to the same definitions, so the history stays comparable.
Why not use our EHR vendor's analytics or build this ourselves?
Your EHR's analytics are usually good for the sites on that EHR, and if every site is on one system they may be all you need. They do not see the other systems, payroll or the GL. Building it yourself is possible with a data team that knows revenue cycle definitions and will maintain the mappings after each acquisition. OC fits when you want that work delivered and kept running.
What are your security and compliance standards?
OutcomeCatalyst is HIPAA-aligned and SOC 2 Type 2 aligned, with the formal audit underway and expected to complete before year-end.
Sources
Physicians Advocacy Institute and Avalere Health, "PAI-Avalere Health Report on Physician Employment Trends and Practice Acquisitions, 2018 to 2026," 2026: physiciansadvocacyinstitute.org
MGMA Stat, "EHR and PM workarounds reveal the hidden cost of broken workflows," poll of July 21, 2026: mgma.com
American Academy of Otolaryngology, summary of the CMS CY 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule final rule (efficiency adjustment to work RVUs), 2025: entnet.org
Book a strategy call to see this on your own group.
Your systems, your documents, and what your people have been carrying around in their heads. Thirty minutes to see what an AI brain could look like in your company.
Book a strategy call
© 2026 OutcomeCatalyst