Let’s talk about a familiar—and frustrating—pattern in healthcare: organizations claim they’re compliant with industry standards, only to follow up with actions that say otherwise. If you work in healthcare vendor credentialing or compliance, you’ve likely seen this on a regular basis.
Take, for example, the ANSI/NEMA SC 1-2020 Standard, established to streamline how healthcare providers and their vendor partners manage credentialing and insurance documentation. It’s a national standard backed by the Consortium for Universal Healthcare Credentialing (C4UHC) and recognized by ANSI (the American National Standards Institute). The goal? Improve efficiency, reduce friction, and—most importantly—protect patient care by standardizing how documentation is requested and shared.
Sounds great, right?
Here’s the problem: some health systems say they comply with the standard…and then may ask for additional requirements such as in-depth drug screen reports that are outside the scope of the standard.
The Compliance Shell Game
It goes something like this:
“Yes, we follow the ANSI standard. But we still need a copy of a 12-panel drug screen report to meet internal policies.” (FYI, the ANSI SC 1-2020 Standard identifies a 10-panel drug screen as the standard.)
That “but” is the red flag. Requiring a copy of a non-employee’s drug screen beyond the Standard recommendation defeats the purpose of having a uniform standard in the first place. It creates confusion, delays, and unnecessary administrative costs—for everyone, in addition to raising potential HIPAA compliance concerns. According to the C4UHC, added requirements such as these lead to turmoil in the credentialing process, not to mention strained relationships between health systems, their vendors and the vendor credentialing organizations (VCOs).
Think about it: if every hospital in the country had a different drug screen panel or requirement, vendors would spend more time filling out paperwork than actually delivering the services that support patient care. That’s the exact type of inefficiency ANSI SC 1-2020 was designed to eliminate.
Why It Matters
We all know credentialing is more than a bureaucratic box to check. It’s about ensuring that the people walking into clinical areas—from biomedical technicians to pharmaceutical reps to device reps—are properly insured, trained, and vetted. When health systems introduce unique requirements, they create risk—not just legal or financial, but clinical. Delays in credentialing can mean delays in service. And delays in service? That can mean compromised patient care.
As Rhett Suhre, one of the founders of C4UHC, puts it: “By embracing a common standard, we eliminate friction and keep the focus on what matters most: delivering high-quality care.”
Time to Walk the Talk
Efforts to establish best practices for credentialing healthcare industry representatives first began in 2012, leading to the formation of C4UHC. Founded on the cornerstones of collaboration and communication, C4UHC promotes the adoption of the ANSI/NEMA SC 1-2020 Standard for healthcare vendor credentialing. This ANSI Standard is a blueprint for modernizing the healthcare vendor ecosystem by reducing waste, avoiding liability pitfalls, and supporting frontline vendors.
Since our formation, we have seen strong interest in adoption, but the need has never been greater to work together today and create forward-thinking solutions for all stakeholders in this issue.
C4UHC is addressing that need by launching an initiative to refresh the ANSI standard to recognize and integrate the input of all the partners in the credentialing process including providers, suppliers, vendor credentialing organizations (VCOs), and other third-party players in the vendor credentialing space.
We invite you to join us to help drive innovation and create a lasting, positive impact in patient care. Please contact us here: https://c4uhc.org/contact/
“Is It Really Compliance If the ‘Yes’ Comes with a ‘But’?”
Let’s talk about a familiar—and frustrating—pattern in healthcare: organizations claim they’re compliant with industry standards, only to follow up with actions that say otherwise. If you work in healthcare vendor credentialing or compliance, you’ve likely seen this on a regular basis.
Take, for example, the ANSI/NEMA SC 1-2020 Standard, established to streamline how healthcare providers and their vendor partners manage credentialing and insurance documentation. It’s a national standard backed by the Consortium for Universal Healthcare Credentialing (C4UHC) and recognized by ANSI (the American National Standards Institute). The goal? Improve efficiency, reduce friction, and—most importantly—protect patient care by standardizing how documentation is requested and shared.
Sounds great, right?
Here’s the problem: some health systems say they comply with the standard…and then may ask for additional requirements such as in-depth drug screen reports that are outside the scope of the standard.
The Compliance Shell Game
It goes something like this:
That “but” is the red flag. Requiring a copy of a non-employee’s drug screen beyond the Standard recommendation defeats the purpose of having a uniform standard in the first place. It creates confusion, delays, and unnecessary administrative costs—for everyone, in addition to raising potential HIPAA compliance concerns. According to the C4UHC, added requirements such as these lead to turmoil in the credentialing process, not to mention strained relationships between health systems, their vendors and the vendor credentialing organizations (VCOs).
Think about it: if every hospital in the country had a different drug screen panel or requirement, vendors would spend more time filling out paperwork than actually delivering the services that support patient care. That’s the exact type of inefficiency ANSI SC 1-2020 was designed to eliminate.
Why It Matters
We all know credentialing is more than a bureaucratic box to check. It’s about ensuring that the people walking into clinical areas—from biomedical technicians to pharmaceutical reps to device reps—are properly insured, trained, and vetted. When health systems introduce unique requirements, they create risk—not just legal or financial, but clinical. Delays in credentialing can mean delays in service. And delays in service? That can mean compromised patient care.
As Rhett Suhre, one of the founders of C4UHC, puts it: “By embracing a common standard, we eliminate friction and keep the focus on what matters most: delivering high-quality care.”
Time to Walk the Talk
Efforts to establish best practices for credentialing healthcare industry representatives first began in 2012, leading to the formation of C4UHC. Founded on the cornerstones of collaboration and communication, C4UHC promotes the adoption of the ANSI/NEMA SC 1-2020 Standard for healthcare vendor credentialing. This ANSI Standard is a blueprint for modernizing the healthcare vendor ecosystem by reducing waste, avoiding liability pitfalls, and supporting frontline vendors.
Since our formation, we have seen strong interest in adoption, but the need has never been greater to work together today and create forward-thinking solutions for all stakeholders in this issue.
C4UHC is addressing that need by launching an initiative to refresh the ANSI standard to recognize and integrate the input of all the partners in the credentialing process including providers, suppliers, vendor credentialing organizations (VCOs), and other third-party players in the vendor credentialing space.
We invite you to join us to help drive innovation and create a lasting, positive impact in patient care. Please contact us here: https://c4uhc.org/contact/