Prepared for Annapolis Internal Medicine · 2026 Strategy Review · Confidential — not for distribution
Annapolis Internal Medicine · Remote Care Service Line

Scalable Fee-for-Service Remote Care in a Value-Based Ecosystem

MDPCP-AHEAD pays you for the panel you already manage. It does not pay for remote physiologic monitoring — that bills separately under the fee schedule, and it scales with the size of the panel rather than with headcount. You kept those program payments instead of splitting them with a Care Transformation Organization, which means you also carry what a CTO would absorb: monitoring labor, device logistics, documented escalation, automated claims. CoachCare supplies exactly that layer, takes no share of your program payments, and is funded out of the monitoring reimbursement it generates.

0
Hospitalizations Avoided, 24 Months
$0.00M
Avoided Cost of Care
$0K
Practice Margin Retained
0
Patients in Active Remote Monitoring (Month 24)

Twenty-four-month projection for a remote monitoring program on a 2,500-patient high-risk cohort — the recommended Year-1 scope, not the full panel. Avoided admissions shown at the model's conservative 20% baseline; the realistic figure for this cohort is roughly double. Avoided-cost figures are clinical and system value; they are not added to the practice margin.

Position of Strength

The Hard Part Is Already Done

Most practices we model have to be convinced that longitudinal care management is worth doing. You have been doing it, under a CMS advanced primary care model, without an institution's infrastructure behind you. Everything below is verified against a primary source.

✓ Verified · CMS / MDH

MDPCP-AHEAD participant — with no CTO partner

Maryland's 2026 participating-practice list carries Annapolis Internal Medicine at 116 Defense Highway, Suite 400, with the CTO field reading “No CTO Partner.” Practices that do partner with one split their program payments with it. You kept yours. (MDH, participation as of 1 Jan 2026)

✓ Verified · CMS

Two-sided risk, already

Annapolis Internal Medicine, LLC is a participant in an Enhanced-track Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO — the highest-risk track, shared savings and shared losses — in a physician-led, low-revenue ACO, since January 2025. (CMS PY2026 Shared Savings Program participant file)

✓ Verified · MDH

Embedded care management since 2021

Maryland's own program materials feature an AIM physician and an AIM care manager presenting to the MDPCP community. The clinical model here is five years of practice, not a hypothesis. (MDH CTO materials, 2021)

✓ Verified

Twenty-two clinicians, one campus

Eight internal medicine physicians and fourteen advanced practice providers — including gerontology and certified diabetes education capability — on a single campus, with a ninth physician joining September 2026. Physician tenure runs from 1991 to the present. One location, one workflow to configure.

✓ Verified · CMS

Your billable population is growing

Anne Arundel County holds 111,257 Medicare-eligible residents. Original Medicare enrollment rose 3.1% year over year while Medicare Advantage fell 1.4% — the fee-for-service population these codes bill on, and that the ACO attributes, is expanding. (CMS enrollment, Apr 2025–Apr 2026; penetration 19.8%, Jul 2026)

✓ Verified

athenaOne, with automated claims

CoachCare's athenahealth integration is bi-directional and is the only care-management integration that generates claims automatically. With no CTO supplying billing support, that is the difference between a program that runs and one that stalls on paperwork.

Why 2026

The Program Stayed. The Codes Got Better.

Two things changed this year, and both cut the same way: Maryland's advanced primary care program was extended rather than retired, and the fee schedule finally pays for the partial months that make up most of real-world monitoring.

Program continuity

MDPCP did not end — it was extended

On 1 January 2026 the program was folded into the AHEAD Model as MDPCP-AHEAD, continuing through 2028, with AHEAD itself running to 2035. Roughly 460 practices and ~350,000 attributed Medicare beneficiaries statewide. The runway is a decade, not a year.

New for CY2026

Short-window RPM codes close the gap

99445 and 99470 pay for 2–15 days of device data and 10–19 minutes of management. A patient who transmitted twelve days used to be unbillable. Now the partial month counts — and partial months are most months.

In the forecast on this page those two codes alone carry $288,710 of net reimbursement — 17.5% of the total. Two years ago that revenue did not exist.

Reimbursement durability

Maryland made telehealth payment permanent

The Preserve Telehealth Access Act of 2025, effective June 2025, removed time restrictions on telehealth reimbursement across Medicaid and commercial insurance. The delivery model underneath remote care is no longer waiver-dependent in this state.

And your Original Medicare population is growing — up 3.1% in the county last year while Medicare Advantage fell 1.4%.

And the argument for doing it with fee-schedule revenue rather than program dollars. Independent evaluation of the Maryland program found real clinical gains — measurably better timely follow-up after chronic-condition exacerbations — alongside a live debate about whether the care-management fees paid for themselves. Whatever the verdict, the strategic point holds: a remote monitoring program funded out of the fee schedule does not depend on a demonstration subsidy continuing at its current level.
The Part Most Vendors Skip

What This Does to Your Benchmark

You carry two-sided risk. New Part B claims for attributed beneficiaries raise your measured total cost of care, so a gross-revenue pitch is worth less to you than it looks. Here is the arithmetic — and the reason we are proposing a monitoring-led program rather than the larger number we could have shown you.

Stated plainly: the Value Analysis in this document is a fee-for-service model. It does not model shared-savings or capitated economics. Do not read a fee-for-service output as risk-side return — the two interact, and the table below is our attempt to show that interaction honestly rather than leave it for you to find.
24-month — recommended cohortAt 20% admission baselineAt 40% baseline
Part B claims added+$1,646,725+$1,646,725
Part A avoided (106 vs 213 admissions at $15,000)−$1,595,585−$3,191,170
Net change in total cost of care+$51,140
essentially neutral
−$1,544,445
strongly favorable
Fee margin retained by the practice+$702,033+$702,033

Why we are not proposing the full panel

Enrolling your whole panel would generate a larger headline and a worse outcome. Monitoring a stable, well-controlled hypertensive produces a monthly charge against your benchmark and very little avoided utilization. Enrolling the cohort where admissions actually happen produces most of the clinical benefit for a fraction of the claims exposure.

That is the recommendation: heart failure, CKD stage 3b–4, COPD, and poorly controlled hypertension and type 2 diabetes first. Roughly 2,500 patients — about half the Medicare panel. Expand only where the data earns it. The panel-wide figure appears later on this page as a ceiling, so you can see it — not as a plan.

And why the number is understated

The avoided-admission engine assumes a generic 20% annual admission rate — a whole-population figure. A genuine heart-failure and advanced-CKD cohort runs well above that, so the model penalizes the very targeting it should reward:

Baseline admission rateAvoidedAvoided cost
20% — model default106$1,595,585
30%160$2,393,378
40% — realistic for this cohort213$3,191,170
50%266$3,988,963

Even at the conservative 20% baseline the added claims are almost exactly offset. At a realistic 40% the program is net favorable to your benchmark by roughly $1.5M before a dollar of margin is counted. Your county's Medicare readmission rate is 19.9% and its emergency-department rate 483.5 per 1,000 beneficiaries, so there is real utilization to move. (CMS Geographic Variation, CY2024)

The revenue we are deliberately not showing you. Maryland's own program guidance states that participating practices “may not bill Medicare for CCM services furnished to attributed Medicare beneficiaries” — the care management fee replaces it. Chronic care management is the code most vendors would have built this proposal on. It is not billable on your attributed panel, so it contributes nothing to any figure on this page.
Still available

Your non-attributed patients

The restriction applies only to attributed beneficiaries. Attribution follows plurality of primary care, so you carry a Medicare population outside it for whom chronic care management is billable. Sizing that group is a discovery question, and we have put no number on it.

Still available

Medicare Advantage and commercial

Chronic care management remains billable to Medicare Advantage plans and commercial payers even for attributed patients. Roughly a fifth of your county's Medicare population sits in Advantage plans.

Unresolved

Principal care management

PCM is not named in the restriction, but it sits in the same care-management family and may be treated the same way. We have excluded it rather than assume in our own favor.

Which leaves remote monitoring — and that is the point. No Maryland program document addresses RPM; the offset logic is specific to care coordination. So the program we are proposing is built entirely on the one thing your care management fee does not already pay for. Scoping out CCM cut the claims added to your benchmark substantially while raising avoided admissions, because the enrollment effort concentrates on device monitoring instead of splitting across programs. The compliance constraint and your risk position point the same direction.
The Architecture

The Layer a CTO Would Supply

A Care Transformation Organization hires and manages an interdisciplinary care management team on a practice's behalf, and takes a share of that practice's program payments for doing it. CoachCare supplies the operational equivalent for a chronic-care program — and is paid from the reimbursement it generates instead.

What CoachCare operates
  • EnrollAn on-site enrollment specialist at CoachCare's expense, plus telephonic outreach and referral capture at the visit.
  • EquipCellular-connected cuffs, scales and glucometers shipped to the patient — no wifi setup, no app dependency, no front-desk logistics.
  • MonitorA dedicated health-coach team reviews transmissions daily against your parameters and escalates on your rules.
  • DocumentTime, care-plan updates and interventions recorded to the standard the codes require — written back into athenaOne.
  • BillClaims generated automatically each month by the CoachCare billing engine.
What stays with you
  • OrderThe clinical decision to enroll, and the parameters each patient is monitored against.
  • DirectMedication and titration decisions when the data surfaces something actionable.
  • OwnThe patient relationship, the care plan, the billing entity, and every dollar of your program payments.
Your care manager keeps her role and loses the busywork. Device logistics, daily transmission review, and monthly documentation volume move to CoachCare. Her time returns to the complex patients where a clinician's judgment is the scarce resource.
Where your ACO enablement sits. Attribution, benchmark analytics and quality reporting are a different function from device monitoring, enrollment labor, and remote-care billing. Nothing here replaces or competes with the partner already doing that work; the two operate on different parts of the same panel.

The CY2026 billing stack

Priced at your own Maryland locality (Novitas JL, carrier 12302, locality 01) — not national averages.

ProgramCodesWhat it pays forMD rate
RPM — device monitoring99453 · 99454 · 99457 · 99458Setup, monthly device supply with 16+ days of data, and 20-minute management increments$23.41 · $55.96 · $54.61 · $43.50
RPM — short window 202699445 · 994702–15 days of device data; 10–19 minutes of management$55.96 · $27.47
CCM — chronic care management99490 · 99439Not billable on your attributed panel — the care management fee replaces it. Retained for non-attributed, Advantage and commercial patientsexcluded
PCM — principal care management99426 · 99427Not named in the restriction but in the same family — excluded pending confirmationexcluded
TCM — transitional care99495 · 99496Post-discharge management within 7 or 14 days — the readmission windownot modeled
What is left out of every number on this page. TCM at each discharge — the highest-leverage readmission intervention available, excluded because we cannot credibly estimate your discharge volume from outside. APCM (G0556–G0558) — your model participation means you would likely qualify, but whether it is offset the same way as chronic care management is not publicly documented, so it contributes nothing. Your HEART payments ($110 per member per month, and from January 2026 directable to any high-need beneficiary you designate) — a budget you already receive that could fund devices and monitoring, which would change the economics again in your favor. And Care Partner Arrangements under the state model, which allow a hospital to fund care management inside an independent practice. Four real levers, none of them counted.
Four Value Layers

In the Order That Matters to You

For a practice carrying two-sided risk, avoided utilization is the first layer and fee margin is what pays for getting it. We have ordered these accordingly.

1 · Avoided admissions and total cost of care
~106 avoided hospitalizations over 24 months on the recommended cohort at the model's conservative baseline — ~213 at an admission rate realistic for heart failure and advanced CKD. That is $1.60M to $3.19M of avoided cost sitting directly against the benchmark you are measured on, against $1.65M of claims added. The post-discharge three-touch protocol is the mechanism, and it is a written standard, not an aspiration.
2 · CTO-equivalent infrastructure, without the split
Monitoring labor, device logistics, documented escalation, compliance documentation and automated claim generation — the operational stack an institution hands its practices. Delivered without taking a share of your program payments, and with an on-site enrollment specialist carried at CoachCare's expense. You are one of a small number of practices in your county operating without that stack; you are also the only kind that keeps all of its own program revenue.
3 · Recurring margin that funds the program
$1.65M of net reimbursement against $945K of program cost on the recommended cohort — $702K retained at a 42.6% margin, and margin-positive from month one. Read this as the mechanism that makes layer 1 self-funding rather than as standalone return.
4 · Quality performance and documentation
Continuous blood-pressure and glucose data, documented monitoring, and a closed escalation loop feed the measures you are already scored on under both the shared-savings program and the state model — hypertension control, diabetes control, post-discharge follow-up, and the claims-based utilization measures. Documentation that already exists is worth more than documentation you have to chase at reporting time.
Clinical Governance

Safe, Disciplined, and Auditable

Every reading in every program routes through one escalation engine with defined thresholds, defined actions, and defined documentation. Your physicians see signal, not noise — and the billed time is defensible on audit.

Route 1

Emergency → 911

Chest pain, new shortness of breath, stroke signs, syncope, worst-ever headache or sudden swelling reported during outreach triggers a 911 call while the patient is still on the line. If the patient refuses, they are routed to the clinic; if they cannot be safely directed, CoachCare activates 911. This policy supersedes any practice-specific escalation preference.

Route 2

Non-critical → your named clinician

Actionable but non-emergent findings route to a specific, pre-agreed member of your care team — not a general inbox. You decide who, and for which thresholds, during configuration.

Route 3

Stable & resolved → the record

Readings worked to resolution are documented as an FYI in the chart with no interruption to your day. This is the route that keeps the other two credible.

One escalation engine, every program

RPM, CCM and PCM all route through the same logic. The rules do not change by program — only the codes do.

  1. Critical values escalate regardless of symptoms. A critical reading is never held pending a symptom check. Symptoms modulate the route, not the decision to act.
  2. Out-of-range but non-critical → retake plus symptom check first. A single out-of-range reading is verified before it becomes an escalation, which is what keeps alert volume clinically meaningful.
  3. Trend is defined objectively, not by impression. An out-of-range trend means three consecutive readings at least one hour apart for blood pressure or glucose, or three readings within seven days for heart rate.
  4. Unreachable patients still escalate. Voicemail plus a callback attempt is logged — and if the value is critical or a trend is established, the escalation proceeds anyway rather than waiting on contact.
  5. Every escalation documents six fields. The vital, the findings, the contact method, who was reached, the outcome, and the follow-up — the audit trail that makes the billed time defensible.

The post-discharge cadence

Any emergency-department visit or hospitalization in the preceding 60 days triggers a fixed three-touch sequence. This is the mechanism behind the avoided-admission figures, and it maps directly onto readmission performance in both your shared-savings program and the state model.

Touch 1 · Day 1–2

Medication reconciliation against the discharge summary, red-flag symptom review, and confirmation that follow-up is actually booked.

Touch 2 · Day 5–8

Adherence and tolerance check, device data reviewed against the pre-admission baseline, escalation if the trajectory is wrong.

Touch 3 · Day 12–14

Stability confirmation and hand-back into the routine monitoring cadence — the window where most preventable readmissions occur.

Continuity governance. Unreachable patients are re-escalated to the practice on a fixed cadence rather than quietly dropped, and the practice is notified at every decision point — including any recommendation to discharge a patient from the program. Nothing leaves the program without your knowledge.
EMR Integration

Built Into the athenaOne Workflow

Your staff do not learn a second system. Enrollment flags, vitals, documentation and claims live inside athenaOne — and CoachCare is the only care-management partner that generates athenahealth claims automatically.

athenaOne → CoachCare

  • Enrollment flags and trigger ordering by service
  • Health history exchange
  • Problem list and medication context
Bi-directional

CoachCare → athenaOne

  • Integrated discrete vitals
  • Escalation tasks routed to your team
  • Compliance documentation & care summary
  • Automated claim generation

Enrollment inside the visit

Qualified Medicare patients are enrolled by CoachCare's team, prompted by enrollment flags in your existing workflow. Enrollment status is visible in real time, and patients begin receiving services in under five days.

Claims without the monthly scramble

The billing engine creates claims automatically, eliminating the manual per-patient, per-month step. For a practice with no CTO supplying billing support, this is the operational difference that decides whether a program survives its first year.

Escalations as athenaOne tasks

Clinical escalations arrive as tasks in the system your physicians already work in, routed to the person you designate — not as email, not as a separate portal login.

A program survives when it is easy on the people who run it. Keeping enrollment, vitals, escalations, and claims inside athenaOne — one chart, one workflow, no second login — is what the integration is for.

athenahealth integration setup and per-patient integration fees are included in the Value Analysis at catalog rates; exact figures are confirmed in contracting.

The Value Analysis

Twenty-Four Months, at Your Own Rates

The charts below model remote monitoring on the recommended 2,500-patient high-risk cohort at Maryland locality rates, with one CoachCare-funded on-site enrollment specialist.

Patients in active monitoring by month

A single-program build, so unique patients and active enrollments are the same number — no dedup is needed: 744 patients at month 24, reached by month 6 and flat from there.

Monthly economics

Net reimbursement, CoachCare fees, and the margin the practice retains. Month 1 carries the one-time implementation and integration setup.

Where the reimbursement comes from

24-month net reimbursement by code family, recommended cohort. Net is apportioned across codes in proportion to gross billed.

ProgramNet reimb.Program costPractice margin
Remote monitoring — devices, data & management$1,646,725$903,939$742,786
Implementation, athenaOne integration & outreach—$40,753−$40,753
24-month total$1,646,725$944,692$702,033
The on-site enrollment specialist is CoachCare's expense. A dedicated specialist working in your office at roughly 80 enrollments a month is carried entirely by CoachCare. It is embedded value in the figures above, never a deduction from your margin.
Year 1 is $311,963 of margin on $734,505 of net reimbursement, at a 42.5% margin; Year 2 is $390,070 on $912,220, at 42.8%. And because a monitoring-only build carries a lighter first-month fee load, the program is margin-positive from month one — there is no negative month at all, and no capital at risk.

Two configurations, so you can see the range

The cohort is what we recommend. Panel-wide is what the opportunity looks like if you eventually screen all 5,000 — shown so the ceiling is visible, not because it is the plan. Note how little it adds: screening the other half of the panel yields only 131 more patients, because the cohort already contains most of the monitoring-appropriate population. Both are priced identically and both are monitoring-only.

ConfigurationNet reimb.Practice marginMargin %Patients at M24Avoided admissions
High-risk cohort — ~2,500 screened Recommended$1,646,725$702,03342.6%744~106–213
Panel-wide — all ~5,000 screened Ceiling$1,906,292$813,81142.7%875~123–246
~106–213

Hospitalizations avoided

$1.60M to $3.19M of avoided cost, depending on the cohort's true baseline admission rate.

$702K

Retained margin

Over 24 months, after all CoachCare fees, at a 42.6% practice margin — positive from month one.

11,369

Care-team hours returned

About 5.5 FTE-years of monitoring, documentation and outreach labor absorbed by CoachCare.

167,536

Physiologic readings

Continuous objective data on the patients driving your utilization.

The model plateaus at month 6 — on purpose

With twenty-two referring clinicians and a full-time enrollment specialist, your outreach capacity is roughly 141 referrals a month before the specialist adds anything. Against a cohort ceiling of 744 patients, that saturates in six months and then holds flat through month 24 — the census at month 12 and at month 24 is the same number.

That flat line is the useful finding: your constraint is the cohort definition and the consent rate, not outreach capacity. Adding clinicians or a second enrollment specialist would not move this number at all. The two levers that do are widening the cohort — deliberately, where the clinical and benchmark case supports it — and consent rate, which is why it is a slider below.

Scenario Explorer

Size the Cohort Yourself

The sliders drive the same enrollment engine and the same per-patient economics as the Value Analysis. At the default positions it reproduces the recommended cohort exactly. Note how little the clinician and specialist sliders move the result — and how much cohort size and consent rate do.

How many high-risk patients you screen — the number most worth testing against athenaOne. Capped at 3,500 because the 85% device-appropriate rate only holds inside a condition-defined cohort; screening the full panel is the separate ceiling scenario above.
Note how little this moves the result once ceilings bind.
Funded by CoachCare, not by the practice.
With physician endorsement and an on-site specialist in a targeted cohort, this is the highest-leverage input in the model.
$1.65M
24-mo net reimbursement
$0.70M
24-mo practice margin
744
Patients monitored at M24
~106
Hospitalizations avoided

Enrollment trajectory under your assumptions

Patients in active monitoring. Cohort eligibility is held at the high-risk profile throughout.

Avoided admissions here use the model's conservative 20% baseline annual admission rate. For a true heart-failure and advanced-CKD cohort the realistic figure is roughly double — see the sensitivity table above.

Getting Started

Chartered in 30 Days

Launch requires no capital, no hiring, and no second system. The work in the first month is clinical agreement and configuration, not construction.

Week 1

Define the cohort, and confirm the billing boundary

Pull the real cohort from athenaOne — heart failure, CKD 3b–4, COPD, and uncontrolled hypertension and type 2 diabetes — which replaces the estimate behind every number on this page. In parallel, confirm against the current payment specifications exactly where the care-management-fee offset begins and ends, so the configuration is right on day one rather than corrected later.

Week 2

Set clinical parameters and escalation routing

Agree monitoring thresholds by condition, name the clinician each non-critical escalation routes to, and confirm the emergent protocol. This is the session that makes the governance model yours — and the one your care manager should lead.

Weeks 2–3

Connect athenaOne

Bi-directional integration configured and tested: enrollment flags, discrete vitals write-back, escalation tasks, and automated claim generation.

Week 4

Enrollment specialist on site, first patients live

The CoachCare-funded specialist begins in your office, referral capture starts at the visit, and the first cohort is monitored and billing within days of consent.

About CoachCare

The Experience to Get It Right

Remote care programs fail on operations, not on clinical intent. Scale is the only real evidence that the operations work.

500,000+

Patients managed

Across more than 400 managed conditions.

10,000+

Clinicians

Providers running remote care programs on the CoachCare platform.

1,000+

Implementations

Programs launched and operating in market.

5M+

Claims generated

Care-plan coding and billing at production scale.

100M+

Vitals recorded

Plus more than 4 million care actions enabled.

<5 days

To first service

From consent to monitored and billing, inside athenaOne.

Policy Watch · CMS-1848-P

2027 Proposed Rule Insights

CMS's CY2027 Physician Fee Schedule proposed rule, published July 16, 2026, proposes to reprice remote physiologic monitoring. Here is what it reaches, what it leaves alone, and how the operating model behind this service line absorbs it.

1

The Proposal Is Confined to RPM

CMS's remote-monitoring proposals sit in one code family: RPM. CCM, PCM, and TCM are not part of them. This forecast models RPM alone, so the proposal does reach it — but only by the amount below, and the care-management codes it leaves untouched are available to this service line as added, unaffected revenue.

2

CoachCare Is Building the Contingencies Now

The delivery model has more than one shape, and CoachCare is preparing each so the service line's economics hold wherever the rule settles. One unbundles the program into its parts — SaaS platform, device logistics, and program enablement — priced as components. Another engages CoachCare to run the staffing itself, an MSO-style arrangement in which the practice owns the clinical program and the billing while CoachCare carries the labor model. Neither requires re-architecting the service line described on this page.

3

ACCESS Moves Remote Care to Risk-Based PMPM

Alongside the fee schedule, CMS's ACCESS Model pays remote care as a risk-based per-member-per-month arrangement rather than per code: recurring per-beneficiary payments, half of each one withheld and reconciled against outcome attainment. Cardiometabolic care is among its four clinical tracks. What earns under that structure — controlled pressures, titrated therapy, decompensations caught early — is what this service line is built to produce.

What the Proposal Actually Takes Off This Forecast

This forecast repriced code by code at CMS's CY2027 proposed values, at this practice's own MAC locality rather than national averages. Same enrollment, same phasing plan — only the rates move.

−20.6%
The headline per-code cut — device supply (99454 / 99445), the code the proposal reprices hardest.
→
−8.8%
The RPM patient-year, because device supply is only 32% of it — the management codes barely move.
RPM alone — the only code family in scope$1,646,725 over 24 months
−$145,211
−8.8% of RPM
RPM, retained at CY2027 proposed rates The proposed reduction

Repriced at this locality's own geographic adjusters. The RPM reductions fall almost entirely on practice expense, so the untouched work component carries more weight in some localities than others; the same repricing at national rates would be −8.8% on RPM.

Where the Proposal Lands, Code Family by Code Family

CY2026 versus CMS's published CY2027 proposed values, shown at national non-facility amounts so they can be read against CMS's own tables. This practice's locality-adjusted amounts differ; the repricing above uses the local figures.

Code familyWhat CMS proposedCY2026CY2027 proposedChange
In scope — remote physiologic monitoring
99454 / 99445 · device supplyPractice expense recrosswalked$52.11$41.38−21%
99457 · management, first 20 minDirect practice expense removed$51.77$49.59−4%
99458 · management, each addl 20 minDirect practice expense removed$41.42$40.39−2%
99453 · setup and patient educationCrosswalked; one-time per patient$21.71$20.03−8%
Not in scope — the codes the proposal does not reach
99424–99427 · PCMNo structural change proposed$67.80$67.00−1%
99490 / 99439 / 99491 · CCMNo structural change proposed$66.13$64.04−3%
99495 / 99496 · TCMNot addressed by the proposalOutside the remote-monitoring provisions entirely

National non-facility amounts; CY2027 values are CMS's own published proposals in Addendum B of CMS-1848-P. The care-management rows show the lead code in each family; every code in those families moves within about 4% in either direction, which is ordinary annual movement rather than a repricing. The RPM reductions are also phased — section 1848(c)(7) of the Act caps any one code's total-RVU reduction at 19% in a single year, and CMS publishes the affected codes, so CY2027 is a single-digit year for a typical program and the remainder arrives no earlier than CY2028.

None of this is final. CMS-1848-P is a proposed rule. Comments are due September 14, 2026, the final rule is expected in early November, and it takes effect January 1, 2027. CoachCare is leading the advocacy — filing comments, putting the device cost and pricing evidence in front of CMS that the rule itself states the agency does not have, and helping practices file their own. This practice gets the final rates, and the model rerun against them, the week they publish.
Why CoachCare for Annapolis Internal Medicine

Built for the Way This Practice Runs

Six reasons this partnership fits Annapolis Internal Medicine specifically, not remote care in general.

athenaOne

We run inside the chart you already use

CoachCare integrates bi-directionally with athenaOne: eligibility flags and orders leave the EHR, and discrete vitals, care documentation and claim-ready charges come back into it. One chart for the clinicians, one workflow for the billing team, and no second system to learn to start.

Full service

The model that runs without hiring

Enrollment outreach, the care team, device logistics, 24/7 alert triage and billing preparation are CoachCare's payroll. The practice inherits a running program the month it turns on, at a 42.6% margin, with no hiring cycle. On-site enrollment is our expense, because telephonic outreach converts about 8%, so we staff the clinic instead.

Governance

The practice stays in charge

Your physicians set the protocols, sign the care plans and make every clinical decision, and claims go out under the group's own entity and the NPIs the physicians and fourteen advanced practice providers already bill through. CoachCare supplies the staff, devices, platform and billing preparation under that governance.

Service line

One spine under the high-risk panel

The recommended Year-1 scope is a 2,500-patient high-risk cohort: heart failure, CKD stage 3b to 4, COPD and poorly controlled hypertension. APCM and CCM run together on that panel under a single care-management spine, and the fee-for-service population, which grew 3.1% year over year while Medicare Advantage fell, is where they bill per claim.

Model readiness

The layer under the risk you already carry

The practice has run an Enhanced-Track Shared Savings ACO, the highest-risk track, with two-sided risk since January 2025, and it participates in Maryland's advanced primary care model. A remote care service line is the connective tissue under both: documented chronic-care management that supports attribution and quality without an institution's infrastructure behind it.

Aligned

Paid as you enroll — no capital, no lock-in

Fees are per active patient per month; there is no capital outlay and no payroll ramp. Because the forecast is set by enrollment pace, throughput is the lever. If the census does not build, CoachCare does not get paid, and the forecast, Disclosures and workbook behind this page are yours to keep either way.

The ask: a working session to validate the Medicare panel against your own chart counts, scope the athenaOne interface, and set the go-live for the 2,500-patient high-risk cohort.