Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kalispell council backs exploring third‑party ambulance billing to boost collections and reduce staff risk
Summary
Councilors gave staff consensus to pursue third‑party EMS billing proposals after staff said outside vendors could raise collection rates from about 40% to over 50%, likely paying for themselves at 5–10% fees.
City staff briefed the Kalispell City Council on a proposal to move ambulance billing to a third‑party vendor to increase revenue collections and reduce dependence on a single administrative staff member in the fire department.
City staff said Kalispell’s ambulance system generates roughly $1.3 million in overall budgeted costs and that current in-house billing collects about $470,000 annually—approximately 40% of billed charges. “Looking at currently, we get about 40% of the billing. This would likely increase us to up over 50%,” City staff member Nygren said when describing anticipated improvements under third‑party billing.
Staff and the assistant fire chief, Kenneth Whitehair, told council that most proposals charge vendors a percentage of collected revenue—typically 5–10 percent—and that, based on conservative examples, a 6 percent fee on improved collections would cost about $30,000 annually while increasing gross collections by roughly $200,000 in the example discussed. Staff said proposals include a one‑time setup fee, training for department staff and secure transfer of receivables after a 30‑ to 60‑day initial billing period.
Councilors raised consumer‑protection concerns and asked whether vendors use aggressive collection tactics or add fees to patient bills. Nygren said the vendor proposals reviewed did not add extra charges to the amounts the city bills; instead the third party would seek to collect outstanding receivables and then retain its percentage of amounts collected. Councilors asked that staff include safeguards and best‑practice evaluations in the request for proposals to screen vendors for compliant billing and collections practices.
Councilors also discussed staffing continuity: one staff member currently handles billing and follow‑up, and call volume has increased about 10–15% per year, making the program vulnerable if that employee becomes unavailable. Several councilors said third‑party billing would provide redundancy and could avoid hiring an additional FTE.
The council gave consensus direction to proceed with the RFP and third‑party evaluation and asked staff to return with the vendor proposals and recommended contract terms for council review. No contract was authorized at the work session.
