Podcast Short 2:13 September 11, 2026From Season 2, Episode 8

Why Initial vs. Final Denial Rate Determines Your RCM Strategy

TW
Thomasina Wilkins·Chief Revenue Officer, Sinai Chicago
In this clip

Thomasina Wilkins draws a distinction that shapes everything about how organizations set denial prevention goals: initial denial rate vs. final denial rate. Initial denial rate is the diagnostic, showing current performance and what work remains. Final denial rate is the benchmark goal, and from a conservative industry perspective she puts the target at 4%. Expecting that as a first-time starting point is unrealistic: payer behavior cannot be perfectly predicted and medical necessity gaps take time to close. Her approach is to benchmark against like facilities (academic vs. specialty clinic, same geographic market) and then sort denials between preventable and non-preventable. Preventable denials are the high-priority targets for day-to-day process improvement at the time of service.

Key Takeaway

Initial and final denial rates measure different things and drive different strategies. Final denial rate is the benchmark target. Initial denial rate is the diagnostic that reveals what preventable work remains. Sorting denials between preventable and non-preventable and prioritizing prevention at the time of service is how organizations close the gap between the two.

“4% is ideal for final denials, but it is not a reasonable denial rate to expect on your first time out the gate. Your goal should be to look at what your performance is now, then gauge what benchmark you want to get to later.”

Thomasina Wilkins, Chief Revenue Officer, Sinai Chicago

Claims Denial ManagementLeadership
From the full episode

Listen to the full conversation.

Thomasina Wilkins
Season 2 · Episode 8 · 39 min

Mission-Driven Revenue Cycle: Denials Prevention, Proactive Loss Mitigation, and Agentic AI at a Safety Net Hospital

Thomasina Wilkins · Chief Revenue Officer, Sinai Chicago

Thomasina Wilkins brings a mission-first framework to claims denial management shaped by more than 25 years of cross-functional revenue cycle leadership across academic medical centers, safety net hospitals, and multi-specialty physician groups. As Chief Revenue Officer at Sinai Chicago, she describes how the proactive loss mitigation philosophy she has developed and shared internationally translates into a denials prevention partnership model that treats every touchpoint in the revenue cycle from scheduling and authorization through clinical documentation and appeals advocacy as a shared organizational responsibility rather than a back-end cleanup problem. The conversation covers how she prioritizes denial categories by return on investment, the distinction between preventable and non-preventable denials as a foundational step in denials management strategy, the importance of recalibrating denial targets every 60 to 90 days as payer behavior and government policy shift, and the unique challenge that medical necessity denials present for mission-driven safety net hospitals that cannot reduce clinical care in order to improve metrics. Thomasina closes with her perspective on agentic AI in the appeals process as the area with the most immediate step-function value, her call for vendors to develop customizable tools that match the specific denial patterns of safety net hospitals and rural facilities, and a leadership principle she returns to throughout: revenue cycle is everyone's responsibility, and lasting improvement requires shared vision across clinical, financial, and operational partners.

Spotify Apple YouTube
Listen to the full episode
Request a demo

Let’s redefine financial engagement together.

See how ArceeHQ can supercharge your revenue cycle. We’ll walk through the platform, discuss your specific systems and goals, and show measurable lift you can expect in the first 90 days.

Reply within 24 hoursNo spam, ever

We’ll never share your information.