# Common Ground Healthcare

### Payerset Notes

**Table of Contents**

<https://mrf.payerset.com/common-ground-healthcare-corporation>

### Compliance Scorecard

Overall Rating: <mark style="color:yellow;">**3/5**</mark>**&#x20;- Average**

<table data-view="cards"><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th data-hidden data-card-cover data-type="files"></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Table of Contents</strong></td><td><strong>★★★☆☆</strong></td><td><mark style="color:yellow;">3<strong>/5</strong></mark></td><td><ul><li>Are the MRFs kept up to date each month? </li><li>Is the Table of Contents link easily accessible?</li><li>Is the Table of Contents properly formatted?</li></ul></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>File Accessibility</strong></td><td><strong>★★★☆☆</strong></td><td><mark style="color:yellow;">3<strong>/5</strong></mark></td><td><ul><li>Are there any barriers to downloading the files?</li><li>Do the Table of Contents links expire before publishing new links?</li></ul></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Data Quality</strong></td><td><strong>★★★★☆</strong></td><td><mark style="color:green;">4<strong>/5</strong></mark></td><td><ul><li><p>What percentage of the MRFs are properly formatted and parseable</p><ul><li>5 Stars - 100%</li><li>4 Stars - 80%...</li></ul></li></ul></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

### Schema: COMMON\_GROUND\_HEALTHCARE

**Rates Records**: 40,066,258

**Provider Records**: 162,155,872

### Additional Observations

**Machine-Readable Price Transparency Files Review**

* **MRFs Up-to-Date:** ❌ No, the MRFs are sometimes delayed in being updated.
* **Table of Contents Accessibility:** ❌  The Table of Contents link is easily accessible.
* **Table of Contents Formatting:** ✔️ Yes, the Table of Contents is properly formatted.
* **File Download Barriers:** ✔️ No barriers to downloading the MRFs.
* **File Accessibility Percentage:** ✔️ 100% of the files are accessible.

**Overall Assessment:** While the data is available, accessing the files can be complex to find as they are nested in multiple layers. This requires extra manual processing in order to even extract rates of the same type & category. The data seems to be duplicated in places which could be due to an interpretation of the CMS regulations but there is room for improvement in accessibility.