Stop Giving Away Your Revenue. Start Keeping It.

A flat SaaS fee is structurally safer because it is not tied to the volume or value of claims you submit. Under the Anti-Kickback Statute and related rules, arrangements where a third party gets paid more as you bill more are inherently higher risk, especially when that party is helping generate those very claims.

A simple, pre-set software fee that approximates fair market value for technology is much easier to defend: you pay the same amount whether you bill ten RPM patients or ten thousand. That reduces the argument that someone is being “rewarded” for volume and helps separate clinical decisions (who to enroll, how often to interact) from how your vendor gets paid.

Most RPM rev-share deals are structured so the vendor keeps a percentage of each paid claim. That means the vendor’s income rises directly with your billing volume, not with actual clinical outcomes. Regulators have repeatedly warned that when payments depend on the volume or value of reimbursable services, you’re in the neighborhood of kickbacks, fee-splitting, or improper financial relationships.

In RPM specifically, many rev-share vendors both generate the billable interactions and share in the resulting reimbursement, which looks uncomfortably like paying someone to create billable events. That combination is exactly what OIG and plan auditors are now scrutinizing.

When a vendor gets paid more every time a claim is submitted, the natural pressure is to maximize billable interactions rather than optimize patient outcomes. You see this in patterns like scripting a fixed number of calls per month whether or not the patient actually needs them, or prioritizing “easy” patients with good insurance.

All of that pushes the program away from “who clinically needs RPM?” and toward “who is profitable to enroll in RPM?” Over time, that erodes trust with patients, frustrates clinicians who see low-value touches, and increases your exposure to allegations of unnecessary services.

Yes. The intent is for that range to be the real, all-in software cost per active patient, not a teaser rate. We don’t add separate charges for “implementation,” “export fees,” “API access,” or “support buckets.”

The model is deliberately simple: a predictable per-active-patient SaaS fee that you can model in a spreadsheet. That makes it easy to see the margin you keep on each claim and to separate the economics of FairPath from device costs and staffing.

It means you only pay for patients who actually generate billable care-management activity in that month, not for your entire panel on standby.

If a patient is enrolled but doesn’t meet the criteria for billing—no qualifying RPM days, no APCM completion, no CCM minutes—you don’t owe a software fee for that patient for that month. This aligns our incentives with yours: FairPath should only cost money when you’re actually running real programs and capturing legitimate revenue.

No. You can choose flexible monthly billing to start, prove the economics in your environment, and adjust if needed without being locked into a multi-year commitment.

If you decide FairPath isn’t the right fit, you can wind down and export your data; there are no punitive termination fees or auto-renew traps that force you to pay for a system you’re not using. We retain clients through value, not legal handcuffs.

We deliberately stop at software and automation because we want your clinical decisions and patient relationships to stay inside your practice.

When an outside call center is incented to generate RPM touches, it can easily become misaligned with what your clinicians actually want. It also complicates your compliance posture regarding supervision and licensure. FairPath is built to make it easy for your own team to run these programs—fewer clicks, better triage, clearer audit trails—without inserting a separate clinical entity between you and your patients.

Our stance is that the data belongs to the practice, not the platform. If you choose to leave, you can export your full patient list, program enrollments, claims, and audit trails in standard formats (CSV/Excel) instantly.

There is no “ransom” fee for exports and no throttling. We design the system so you can pull out complete records of what was done, when, and why—both for continuity of care and for defensibility in any future review.