Table of Contents
Ready to See Results?
From strategy through execution, Atlantic Health Strategies integrates compliance, operations, and growth into durable, measurable results. Let’s put our expertise to work for your organization.
The ASAM Assessment Is the Audit
Under the ASAM Criteria, 4th Edition, the six-dimension assessment IS the level-of-care decision, not paperwork that follows one. If a Joint Commission surveyor or a commercial payer SIU auditor cannot read your dimensional documentation and independently arrive at the level you billed, the chart is indefensible. The takeback letter is a matter of when, not why.
Last month I sat in a clinical leadership meeting in South Florida where a medical director walked us through 14 admissions from a single week. Eleven at residential. Three at PHP (an outpatient level of care under ASAM, not residential). When I asked how the dimensional assessments supported residential over PHP, the room went quiet.
That silence is the audit finding before the auditor ever shows up.
ASAM itself is explicit about how the decision rules work. Dimensions 1 through 5 develop the level-of-care recommendation. Dimension 6 is where the assessor works with the patient on person-centered considerations that shape the final placement. Decision rules. Not documentation rules. CMS, state Medicaid agencies, and commercial payer SIU teams are no longer asking whether you used ASAM. They are asking whether the six dimensions, as documented, actually justify the level you billed.
Who Is Actually Reading These Charts
Three sets of eyes matter right now.
First, DOJ and its US Attorney’s Offices. On December 10, 2025, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania announced that Recovery Centers of America agreed to pay $2 million to resolve allegations that it violated the Controlled Substances Act and the False Claims Act. United States Attorney David Metcalf announced that RCA agreed to pay $1,000,000 to resolve allegations that it failed to comply with provisions of the Controlled Substances Act, and an additional $1,000,000 to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by billing the government for drug and alcohol treatment services that it failed to adequately provide. The DEA conducted audits and investigations at RCA facilities in Pennsylvania and Maryland between 2019 and 2024. HHS-OIG and OPM-OIG worked the case alongside DEA. The whistleblower, a former Outcomes Supervisor at RCA’s corporate headquarters in King of Prussia, Pa., received a $230,000 share of the settlement amount.
Second, state attorneys general and Medicaid integrity units. In Massachusetts, CleanSlate Centers agreed to pay $4.5 million to resolve allegations that it submitted false claims for urine drug tests that were medically unnecessary and were illegally performed at the company’s own laboratory. That resolution was the first civil settlement under the Massachusetts clinical laboratory anti-self-referral law, originally proposed by the AG’s Office. Then-AG Maura Healey put the message on the record: “it’s important that treatment centers follow the rules and not cut corners to increase their bottom line.” Read that as a template, not an outlier.
Third, your commercial payers. Insurers reported receiving about 496 million claims in 2024, with 91% filed for in-network services, and approximately 85 million in-network claims were ultimately denied, resulting in an average in-network denial rate of 19%. Behavioral health sits at the higher end of that range. When your UM team cannot speak to withdrawal risk, biomedical status, and continued-service needs in concrete patient-specific terms, you are losing the appeal before you write it.
What Good Documentation Actually Looks Like
Generic narratives kill claims. “Patient has high relapse potential” is not documentation. It is a label.
Documentation reads like this: “Patient relapsed within 72 hours of completing IOP in February 2024, lost housing in April, and presents with active cravings rated 8/10 with no sober support contacts within 50 miles.” One of those gets paid. The other gets a takeback letter 18 months later.
Joint Commission and CARF surveyors are tracing this exact pathway. Every level-of-care decision must be defensible under ASAM 4th Edition criteria, and surveyors want all six dimensions documented at admission, at each level-of-care change, and at discharge. That is not a coding preference. That is the survey.
ASAM’s 4th Edition also reordered the dimensions in ways that change how clinicians write. The Fourth Edition integrates readiness-to-change considerations across all dimensions and introduces Dimension 6: Person-Centered Considerations, which covers barriers to care including social determinants of health (SDOH), patient preferences, and the need for motivational enhancement. If your assessment template still reads like 3rd Edition, your surveyor already knows.
The Operational Backbone Behind the Clinical Call
This is where most facilities fail. Clinical teams make a defensible ASAM call. Intake documents it differently. UM appeals on a third rationale. Billing codes a fourth way. Four versions of the same admission, all in one chart.
That is the pattern we see in roughly 60% of the charts my team audits during onboarding. The financial exposure is real.
Per HFMA reporting on Kodiak Solutions data, overall initial denial of coverage rates climbed to 11.81% of claims in 2024 from 11.53% the previous year, even as authorization-related denials dropped to 1.52% of claims in 2024 from 1.64% in 2023. Kodiak’s Matt Szaflarski, vice president of revenue cycle intelligence, said it directly: “Payors appear to be using initial denials to slow payments, even though they ultimately pay approximately 90% of claims.” Behavioral health takes the hit harder than most specialties because concurrent review and medical-necessity determinations are tied directly to ASAM dimensional documentation.
Your operators need workflow, not more training. ASAM dimensions have to flow from the assessment into the treatment plan, into UM talking points, and into the claim, with the same patient-specific language at every stop. When intake, clinical, UM, and revenue cycle read from different scripts, a payer SIU audit will find it in 30 minutes.
What to Do Before Your Next Survey Window
Pull 20 charts. Not your best 20. Random 20. Read the ASAM assessment. Read the level of care billed. Ask whether a stranger could connect the two without help from the clinician. If the answer is no on more than three charts, your leaders have a systemic problem, not a clinician problem.
Then check your source of truth. If your intake team is still working from a 3rd Edition template, that is your first workflow fix. Bring me your last 90 days of denial letters. Redact them, stay HIPAA and 42 CFR Part 2 compliant, and my team will read them with you. The pattern is almost always in the ASAM workflow, not the billing department.
- Audit 20 random charts for dimensional alignment with billed level of care.
- Rewrite the intake template to 4th Edition dimensions and subdimensions.
- Align UM talking points to the same dimensional language used in the clinical note.
- Reconcile the claim so the code matches the assessment, every time.
The RCA and CleanSlate cases did not turn on a single bad chart. They turned on patterns that lived inside the operational backbone for years before a whistleblower or an auditor pulled the thread. Your job is to pull the thread first.
Frequently asked questions
Is PHP a residential level of care under ASAM 4th Edition?
No. Partial Hospitalization (PHP) is an outpatient level of care under the ASAM Criteria, 4th Edition. Only residential settings and withdrawal-management (detox) settings are residential. Operators who describe PHP as residential in marketing, admissions scripts, or payer conversations create documentation mismatches that surface immediately in audits by state Medicaid integrity units and commercial payer SIUs.
What are payers actually looking for when they deny on ASAM grounds?
Patient-specific, dated, dimensional justification for the level billed, and evidence that lower levels of care were considered and ruled out. Dimension 6 (Person-Centered Considerations) covers barriers to care including social determinants of health, patient preferences, and the need for motivational enhancement. Surveyors and payers expect all six dimensions documented at admission, at each level-of-care change, and at discharge.
How high are claim denial rates right now, and where does behavioral health sit?
KFF’s analysis of ACA marketplace plans found insurers denied 19% of in-network claims in 2024, with approximately 85 million in-network claims ultimately denied out of about 496 million total claims reported on HealthCare.gov. Behavioral health typically sits at the higher end of that range, driven largely by concurrent review and medical-necessity determinations tied to ASAM dimensional documentation.
How much did the industry-wide initial denial rate climb in 2024?
Kodiak Solutions data reported by HFMA show initial denial rates climbed to 11.81% of claims in 2024, up from 11.53% in 2023, even as authorization-related denials dropped to 1.52% from 1.64%. Kodiak’s Matt Szaflarski said payers appear to be using initial denials to slow payments, though they ultimately pay approximately 90% of claims. The operational answer is upstream: fix the dimensional documentation before the denial, not after.
References
- U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Recovery Centers of America $2 Million Settlement (Dec. 10, 2025)
- HHS-OIG Enforcement Action. Recovery Centers of America
- Mass.gov. CleanSlate Centers $4.5 Million Settlement
- KFF. Claims Denials and Appeals in ACA Marketplace Plans in 2024
- HFMA. Insurers, Patients Pay Less of Their Bills (Kodiak Solutions Data)
- Kodiak Solutions. Rate of Initial Denials Continued to Rise in 2024