Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Credentialing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislators back change to insurer credentialing rules to speed providers into in‑network practice
Summary
House Bill 3242 would require insurers to pay providers who join an in‑network practice the in‑network rate during the credentialing period, so long as the provider submits a complete application and is ultimately credentialed. Sponsors and hospital systems said the change would speed new hires into service and reduce recruitment frictions; the
Representative Ed Deal introduced House Bill 3242, a narrow change that would require insurers to pay providers who join an in-network practice the in-network rate during the insurer credentialing period, subject to a clean-application and an ultimate credentialing determination.
Dr. Christine Clark, chief medical officer for Salem Health Medical Group, and speakers from Samaritan Health Services and the Hospital Association of Oregon supported the bill, saying the 60–90 day credentialing lag makes recruiting and onboarding new clinicians difficult and can delay patient access. They described credentialing as a federal requirement that individual insurers separately execute; when a provider leaves or joins in-network groups, the credentialing lag can leave clinics with uncompensated sessions or providers unable to see insured patients.
Opponents were minimal; PacificSource and Regence said they were neutral with suggested clarifications. Representative Deal said he would accept an amendment to require reimbursement recoveries if a provider fails to submit a complete application or is later denied credentialing.
Why it matters Recruitment and onboarding friction is a recognized contributor to provider shortages. The bill is a technical fix to insurer payment practice during credentialing that supporters said will let newly hired clinicians see patients and be paid at in-network rates while insurers complete credentialing checks.
