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

You already do the work. You do it with no CTO behind you — and the layer you're missing pays for itself.

You kept your program payments instead of splitting them with a Care Transformation Organization, and you carry the care management in house to earn that. What a CTO would hand you — monitoring labor, device logistics, documented escalation, automated claims — CoachCare supplies without taking a share of those payments, funded out of remote monitoring reimbursement that your program payments do not offset.

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. Illustrative, modeled — verify against practice data. 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 is not a hypothesis here — it is five years of practice. (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, directional — 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. (Language is from the program's published guide; the current payment specifications are not publicly accessible, so confirm against them before relying on this either way.)
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 favour.

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 is not displaced — she is unburdened. 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 favour. 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. Illustrative, modeled — verify against practice data. 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.

“Key to achieving a program that is efficient, effective and sustainable is creating a seamless, intuitive user experience for the patient and provider — and that is what our integration with athenahealth accomplishes.”

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. Illustrative and modeled — to be validated against your athenaOne chart counts.

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. Illustrative, modeled — verify against practice data.

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. Illustrative, modeled — verify against practice data.

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. Illustrative, modeled — verify against practice data.

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

No capital, no hiring, 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 committed to remote care excellence.

1,000+

Implementations

Successful in-market programs launched.

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.

Transparency

Assumptions & Sources

Every number on this page is either a cited public fact or a modeled projection. This section says which is which, and what we could not establish.

How the cohort and the panel were estimated — and why they are the first things to check

The recommended configuration screens a 2,500-patient high-risk cohort: patients carrying heart failure, CKD stage 3b–4, COPD, or poorly controlled hypertension or type 2 diabetes. That is roughly half of an estimated 5,000-patient Medicare panel — consistent with chronic-condition prevalence in an adult internal medicine Medicare population, and an estimate, not a count. Of those 2,500, the model enrolls 744: 85% judged device-appropriate, of whom 35% consent.

The panel figure is derived from provider count and typical adult internal medicine Medicare panel density, then sanity-checked against the local market: Anne Arundel County carries 111,257 Medicare-eligible residents, so 5,000 is about 4.5% of the county's Medicare population — credible for one established practice of this size. The plausible range is roughly 4,000 to 6,300.

Because the model is ceiling-limited, both figures move the 24-month result close to proportionally. Pulling the real counts in week 1 is the single highest-value action in the roadmap, and every figure here is illustrative and modeled until that happens.

How reimbursement was calculated

Every code is priced at the 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule non-facility rate for your locality — Novitas Solutions JL, carrier 12302, locality 01 — resolved from ZIP 21401, not from national averages.

Reimbursement is modeled net, not gross: a 2.5% denial rate, 20% patient coinsurance with a 25% bad-debt assumption on that coinsurance, and realistic code-completion rates rather than assuming every eligible code is billed every month. Add-on codes are modeled at partial hit rates. The result is a net-collected figure, not billed charges.

How enrollment was projected

Three pathways run in parallel: referral capture at the visit (22 referring clinicians, eight referrals each per month, 80% patient accept rate), one on-site enrollment specialist at 80 enrollments per month, and telephonic outreach at a deliberately conservative conversion. All three ramp over the first four months rather than starting at full productivity.

The consent rate is 35%. Device-appropriate eligibility is 85% within the recommended cohort — a deliberate condition-defined override of the 65% figure a panel-wide primary-care build would use, appropriate because the cohort is selected by diagnosis. The ceiling is cohort × eligibility × consent — 2,500 × 85% × 35% = 744 — which is why the census plateaus at month 6 and the month-12 and month-24 counts are identical. Enrolled patients attrit at 1.5% per month. Outreach capacity is roughly 141 referrals a month before the specialist is counted, so capacity is not the binding constraint at any point.

For the panel-wide ceiling, eligibility is derived from the bottom up rather than taken from a default, so the two scenarios stay consistent: the cohort's 2,125 device-appropriate patients plus roughly 15% of the 2,500 patients outside the cohort gives about 2,500 device-appropriate patients across the whole panel — 50% — and a ceiling of 875. That is why screening the other half of the panel adds only 131 patients: the cohort already contains 85% of the monitoring-appropriate population.

How avoided admissions were estimated — and why the figure is conservative

Avoided hospitalizations are modeled as RPM patient-months × a baseline annual admission rate × a 40% reduction factor, valued at $15,000 per admission. The model's default baseline is a 20% annual admission rate — a general Medicare population figure.

A genuine heart-failure and advanced-CKD cohort runs materially above that, which means the default understates the clinical value of targeting. The sensitivity range shown (106 to 266 avoided admissions across 20% to 50% baselines) exists so the assumption is visible rather than buried. For local context, CMS reports an Anne Arundel Medicare acute readmission rate of 19.9% and 483.5 emergency-department visits per 1,000 beneficiaries (CY2024).

Avoided-admission value is presented as clinical and system value. It is not added to the practice margin anywhere on this page.

What is deliberately excluded, and what we could not resolve
  • CCM (99490 / 99439) — excluded from all figures. Published program guidance states participating practices may not bill Medicare for chronic care management furnished to attributed beneficiaries; the care management fee replaces it. It remains billable for non-attributed, Medicare Advantage and commercial patients, and we have put no number on that.
  • PCM (99426 / 99427) — excluded. Not named in the restriction, but in the same care-management family. We chose not to assume in our own favour.
  • APCM (G0556–G0558) — excluded. Whether it is offset the same way is not publicly documented. Zero dollars.
  • TCM (99495 / 99496) — excluded, because discharge volume cannot be credibly estimated without your data. Real upside.
  • Your existing program dollars — care management fees, HEART payments, and Care Partner Arrangements are not modeled anywhere, and none of them are assumed to change.
  • Shared savings — not modeled. The Value Analysis is a fee-for-service model and does not model shared-savings, capitated, or care-management-fee economics. The benchmark-interaction table is directional analysis, not a projection of accountable care organization performance.
  • Vintage caveat on the CCM restriction: the language we rely on appears in the program's published getting-started guide rather than the current payment specifications, which are not publicly accessible. The rationale is structural and we expect it holds, but confirm it before relying on it in either direction.
Verified facts and their vintages
  • MDPCP-AHEAD participation and “No CTO Partner” status — Maryland Department of Health, 2026 MDPCP-AHEAD Participating Practice List, participation as of 1 January 2026, listed at 116 Defense Highway Suite 400. CTO definition and the program-payment split are from MDH's own CTO information page.
  • Enhanced-track Shared Savings Program participation — CMS PY2026 Medicare Shared Savings Program participant file, retrieved July 2026: Annapolis Internal Medicine, LLC, Enhanced track, physician-led low-revenue ACO, agreement start 1 January 2025.
  • Program continuity — MDPCP folded into the AHEAD Model 1 January 2026 as MDPCP-AHEAD, continuing through 2028; AHEAD runs to 2035. ~460 practices and ~350,000 attributed Medicare beneficiaries statewide (MDH, December 2025).
  • Practice profile — eight internal medicine physicians and fourteen advanced practice providers (22 practising clinicians, rising to 23 with a ninth physician in September 2026); single campus at 116 Defense Highway, Annapolis MD 21401; practice founded 1974. Source: the practice's own site and the national provider registry, retrieved July 2026.
  • County Medicare market — 111,257 Medicare eligibles, 19.8% Medicare Advantage penetration (CMS State/County penetration, July 2026, corroborated at 20.0% by CMS monthly enrollment for April 2026); Original Medicare +3.1% and Medicare Advantage −1.4% year over year (CMS monthly enrollment, April 2025 to April 2026); acute readmission rate 19.9% and 483.5 emergency-department visits per 1,000 beneficiaries (CMS Geographic Variation, CY2024).
  • Maryland telehealth — Preserve Telehealth Access Act of 2025, Chapter 482, effective 1 June 2025.
  • CY2026 fee-schedule rates — Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, carrier 12302 locality 01. Revised annually and by locality.
  • EMR — athenaOne, as confirmed by the practice. Exact product configuration is a contracting-stage item.
  • CoachCare scale figures — company-reported, 2026.

Not asserted anywhere on this page: any quality rating; any existing remote monitoring program; any statement about the practice's finances, intentions, or performance under its accountable care organization; or any resolution of the care-management-fee question beyond the published language quoted. Where we do not know something, we have left it out rather than estimated it.