Intelligence dashboard

All public non-Medicaid graphs on one page

O1 through O17 in one scroll. Start here for a visual scan, then open domain pages or the knowledge graph for deeper relationship context.

Total visuals: 17 Observed: 10 Derived: 7 Sparse: 0

Open knowledge graph Open visuals directory Back to Intelligence Hub How to interpret all non-Medicaid visuals

Quick jump

O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 O6 O7 O8 O9 O10 O11 O12 O13 O14 O15 O16 O17

O1 · CPT Fee Drift Heatmap

Facility versus non-facility baseline drift by code.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

PFS fee schedule rows meet full support thresholds for this view.

Support: 19,277 of 19,277 entities met support thresholds.

Required fields present: facility RVU, non-facility RVU, conversion factor
National fee schedule coverage available for all included codes

Compare two measures

Horizontal bar chart comparing Facility rate and Non-facility rate across 10 categories.

10 categories compared across Facility rate and Non-facility rate.
27278 has the highest facility rate at 439.22.
27278 has the highest non-facility rate at 13,754.82.

Facility rate and Non-facility rate comparison table
Category	Facility rate	Non-facility rate
0446T	48.77	6,320.12
0448T	82.17	6,219.58
33285	75.82	4,012.12
95149	2.67	118.57
G2083	31.06	1,356.08
65778	35.74	1,274.24
52443	172.35	5,904.28
95148	2.67	89.18
27278	439.22	13,754.82
G2082	31.06	952.59

O2 · RVU-to-Rate Divergence

Codes where RVU intensity and observed rates diverge.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

Work RVU and non-facility rate relationship is complete for the supported code universe.

Support: 19,277 of 19,277 entities met support thresholds.

Work RVU and non-facility rate must both be present
Expected-rate baseline uses complete observed code set

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Work RVU against Non-facility rate ($) for 24 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

24 bubble points shown.
37277 has the highest work rvu at 15.
37277 has the highest non-facility rate ($) at 15,420.86.

Work RVU and Non-facility rate ($) bubble chart table
Label	Work RVU	Non-facility rate ($)	Bubble size
0446T	1.11	6,320.12	1,397.653
0448T	1.86	6,219.58	813.937
33285	1.49	4,012.12	652.188
95149	0.06	118.57	474.22
G2083	0.7	1,356.08	464.54
27278	7.66	13,754.82	429.372
52443	3.62	5,904.28	388.472
65778	0.82	1,274.24	369.33
95148	0.06	89.18	352.535
36516	1.52	2,227.84	347.403
G2082	0.7	952.59	321.363
55874	2.95	3,704.49	295.26
75580	0.73	886.79	285.082
75577	0.85	1,012.05	279.085
37271	9	10,562.7	274.86
37279	4	4,636.04	271.228
36836	7.02	8,032.92	267.572
37262	3	3,409.23	265.613
19296	3.54	3,993.41	263.545
91111	0.88	956.94	253.447
37273	12.63	13,228.43	243.498
95146	0.06	62.46	241.913
37277	15	15,420.86	238.698
96425	0.17	174.02	237.602

O3 · Global Surgery Mix View

Global-period procedural mix with complexity split for review sequencing.

Derived support Coverage 43.43% Join success 43.43%

Global-period coverage is strong enough for planning context but not complete enough for observed classification.

Support: 8,372 of 19,277 entities met support thresholds.

Snapshot cms.pfs.2026@2026-03-31T18:58:47.492Z · Schema intelligence.pricing.global-surgery-mix.v1 · Generated 4/6/2026

Distribution of PFS code mix across global-period bands with a complexity split.

Required fields: globalDays, workRVU, nonFacility RVU, conversionFactor
Observed threshold: >= 85% support coverage

Uses Medicare global-period indicators and national rates only.
Does not include local payer modifiers or claim-level adjudication context.

Composition by category

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing Higher complexity cohort and Routine cohort by category.

7 categories shown with stacked values for Higher complexity cohort and Routine cohort.
90-day major has the highest combined total at 3,761.

Higher complexity cohort and Routine cohort stacked share table
Category	Higher complexity cohort	Routine cohort	Total
90-day major	3,528	233	3,761
No global/bundled	65	2,251	2,316
0-day procedural	378	879	1,257
Related service window	110	445	555
10-day minor	98	367	465
Maternity global	14	3	17
Carrier-defined global	1	0	1

O4 · Modifier Sensitivity Matrix

Status-code sensitivity proxy based on drift concentration to prioritize modifier-focused local checks.

Derived support Coverage 50.21% Join success 50.21%

Modifier sensitivity proxy has enough support for planning context but remains incomplete for observed classification.

Support: 9,679 of 19,277 entities met support thresholds.

Snapshot cms.pfs.2026@2026-03-31T18:58:47.492Z · Schema intelligence.pricing.modifier-sensitivity-proxy.v1 · Generated 4/6/2026

Status-code group sensitivity proxy based on facility/non-facility drift concentration.

Required fields: facility RVU, nonFacility RVU, conversionFactor
Observed threshold: >= 85% support coverage

This is a derived proxy and does not directly measure modifier-field behavior.
Use for planning sequence only; validate with local modifier audits before conclusions.

Composition by category

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing Review-priority proxy and Baseline proxy by category.

7 categories shown with stacked values for Review-priority proxy and Baseline proxy.
A has the highest combined total at 9,409.

Review-priority proxy and Baseline proxy stacked share table
Category	Review-priority proxy	Baseline proxy	Total
A	935	8,474	9,409
R	15	89	104
N	12	45	57
B	3	35	38
X	2	12	14
T	1	7	8
I	0	49	49

O5 · OPPS APC Payment Bands

Outpatient payment concentration by APC band.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

OPPS APC grouping coverage is complete for active payment-rate rows.

Support: 18,986 of 18,986 entities met support thresholds.

APC and payment-rate fields must be present
Status-indicator coverage required for grouped output

Compare two measures

Horizontal bar chart comparing Median payment and P90 payment across 10 categories.

10 categories compared across Median payment and P90 payment.
0845 has the highest median payment at 4,505,000.
0845 has the highest p90 payment at 4,505,000.

Median payment and P90 payment comparison table
Category	Median payment	P90 payment
0845	4,505,000	4,505,000
9138	3,685,266.67	3,685,266.67
0908	3,335,820	3,335,820
0714	3,327,859.73	3,327,859.73
0748	3,252,508.08	3,252,508.08
0906	3,180,000	3,180,000
0746	2,939,968.89	2,939,968.89
9141	2,588,981.23	2,588,981.23
0824	2,332,000	2,332,000
2067	770,620	770,620

O6 · CLFS Variance Atlas

Variance concentration by CLFS family.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

CLFS family grouping and national-limit comparisons meet observed support thresholds.

Support: 2,038 of 2,038 entities met support thresholds.

Rate and national-limit values required for each included code
Family-level grouping must meet minimum row support

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Median rate ($) against Average variance (%) for 20 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

20 bubble points shown.
03 has the highest median rate ($) at 797.45.
81 has the highest average variance (%) at 0.

Median rate ($) and Average variance (%) bubble chart table
Label	Median rate ($)	Bubble size
81	255.05	26.333
87	22.75	19.917
86	14.05	18.583
82	15.45	14.75
84	13.72	10.667
83	16.67	8.833
85	9.72	8
02	720	8
04	760	7.833
00	450.91	7.667
80	18.64	7.5
03	797.45	7
05	473.91	6.667
01	356.13	6.5
88	27.64	5
G0	26.49	5
89	8.61	5
P2	4.95	5
Q0	9.74	5
78	11.06	5

O7 · Drug Margin Pressure Board

Acquisition context versus charge range for curated drug codes.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

Curated HCPCS drug set has complete acquisition and charge context for the surfaced rows.

Support: 50 of 50 entities met support thresholds.

Curated code must have acquisition cost and charge-range fields
Category classification required for inclusion

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Acquisition cost ($) against High markup (%) for 24 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

24 bubble points shown.
J7070 has the highest acquisition cost ($) at 3.36.
J0665 has the highest high markup (%) at 272,008.84.

Acquisition cost ($) and High markup (%) bubble chart table
Label	Acquisition cost ($)	High markup (%)	Bubble size
J0665	0.074	272,008.84	5
J1836	0.02	249,900	5
J0461	0.06	166,566.67	5
J7620	0.085	117,547.06	5
J0131	0.045	111,011.11	5
J0134	0.045	111,011.11	5
J3480	0.1	49,900	5
J3475	0.25	39,900	5
J7613	0.2	37,400	5
J2550	0.1	34,900	5
J7030	2.45	28,471.43	5
J7040	2.45	28,471.43	5
J1920	0.4	24,900	5
J3010	0.08	18,650	5
J0153	0.42	17,757.14	5
J0330	0.15	16,566.67	5
Q0162	0.22	14,518.18	5
J1100	0.2	12,400	5
J1171	0.05	11,900	5
J1644	0.22	11,263.64	5
J2704	0.046	10,769.57	5
J2250	0.12	9,900	5
J7070	3.36	9,513.1	5
J2405	0.35	8,471.43	5

O8 · ASP Shock Tracker

Category-level ASP shock and payment limit outliers.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

ASP payment-limit coverage is complete for the tracked quarterly code set.

Support: 876 of 876 entities met support thresholds.

ASP payment limit must be present for included code
Category median is computed only from available category members

Compare two measures

Horizontal bar chart comparing Payment limit and Category median across 10 categories.

10 categories compared across Payment limit and Category median.
Q2057 has the highest payment limit at 770,620.
Q2057 has the highest category median at 14.904.

Payment limit and Category median comparison table
Category	Payment limit	Category median
Q2057	770,620	14.904
Q2056	587,649.574	14.904
Q2042	566,531.304	14.904
Q2054	562,201.242	14.904
Q2055	558,081.726	14.904
Q2041	532,192.241	14.904
Q2053	489,450.202	14.904
J3402	201,669.021	14.904
J9029	64,274.791	14.904
Q2043	54,404.108	14.904

O9 · NDC-HCPCS Coverage Gaps

Crosswalk and NADAC completeness by HCPCS.

Derived support Coverage 70.94% Join success 70.94%

Crosswalk/NADAC linkage is high but not complete; unmapped rows are retained as explicit coverage gaps.

Support: 691 of 974 entities met support thresholds.

Crosswalk and NADAC joins are required for full-coverage classification
Unmapped codes are surfaced instead of dropped

Composition by category

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing NADAC-mapped NDCs and Missing links by category.

10 categories shown with stacked values for NADAC-mapped NDCs and Missing links.
Q9967 has the highest combined total at 92.

NADAC-mapped NDCs and Missing links stacked share table
Category	Missing links	Total
Q9967	92	92
J3475	56	56
J3480	43	43
J0153	30	30
J0461	26	26
J7070	23	23
A9585	21	21
J0282	17	17
J1956	16	16
J0131	10	10

O10 · NCCI Conflict Frequency Board

Precompiled PTP conflict density by family.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

Precompiled NCCI conflict summaries meet full support thresholds for family-level analysis.

Support: 3,344,416 of 3,344,416 entities met support thresholds.

Data must come from precompiled summary artifact
Runtime shard fan-out is prohibited

Composition by category

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing Modifier-allowed pairs and Other conflict pairs by category.

10 categories shown with stacked values for Modifier-allowed pairs and Other conflict pairs.
27 has the highest combined total at 172,908.

Modifier-allowed pairs and Other conflict pairs stacked share table
Category	Modifier-allowed pairs	Other conflict pairs	Total
27	146,535	26,373	172,908
33	121,591	30,547	152,138
00	96,429	24,716	121,145
01	76,131	19,674	95,805
81	91,567	1,108	92,675
43	72,125	19,708	91,833
26	75,011	12,824	87,835
28	74,404	12,339	86,743
21	70,023	14,361	84,384
64	62,141	15,423	77,564

O11 · MUE Constraint Surface

Unit limit constraint bands for pre-submit review.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

MUE unit-constraint rows meet required support for tracked code bands.

Support: 13,800 of 13,800 entities met support thresholds.

Constraint rows require max units and rationale fields
Band assignment requires deterministic threshold mapping

Constraint band share

Constraint band share. Donut chart showing category share of the total.

4 categories shown.
Total value across categories: 13,800.
Hard stop is the largest slice at 8,783 (63.6%).

Constraint band share data table
Category	Value	Share
Hard stop	8,783	63.6%
Review priority	2,968	21.5%
Moderate	746	5.4%
Flexible	1,303	9.4%

Ranked trend profile

Line chart showing ranked max units values across 20 points.

20 ranked points shown.
13133 has the highest max units at 7.
0006M has the lowest max units at 1.

Max units ranked trend table
Rank	Label	Max units
1	13133	7
2	15201	7
3	17260	7
4	17261	7
5	25260	7
6	0106T	4
7	0107T	4
8	0108T	4
9	0109T	4
10	0110T	4
11	0009U	2
12	0010U	2
13	0016M	2
14	0018U	2
15	0022U	2
16	0003M	1
17	0003U	1
18	0004M	1
19	0005U	1
20	0006M	1

O12 · ZIP Reimbursement Gradient

Locality-level gradient and sample ZIP mappings.

Derived support Coverage 95.02% Join success 95.02%

ZIP-to-locality linkage is strong but should be interpreted as planning context for local reimbursement gradients.

Support: 40,816 of 42,956 entities met support thresholds.

ZIP rows require valid locality and state assignment
GPCI composite must be available for mapped locality

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Composite GPCI against Gradient (%) for 24 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

24 bubble points shown.
SAN JOSE-SUNNYVALE-SANTA CLARA (SAN BENITO CNTY) has the highest composite gpci at 1.252.
SAN JOSE-SUNNYVALE-SANTA CLARA (SAN BENITO CNTY) has the highest gradient (%) at 25.21.

Composite GPCI and Gradient (%) bubble chart table
Label	Composite GPCI	Gradient (%)	Bubble size
SAN JOSE-SUNNYVALE-SANTA CLARA (SAN BENITO CNTY)	1.252	25.21	5
ALASKA*	1.252	25.19	46
SAN JOSE-SUNNYVALE-SANTA CLARA (SANTA CLARA CNTY)	1.247	24.71	19.333
SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND-BERKELEY (MARIN CNTY)	1.227	22.65	6.833
SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND-BERKELEY (SAN FRANCISCO/SAN MATEO/ALAMEDA/CONTRA COSTA CNTY)	1.225	22.53	42.333
NAPA	1.168	16.8	5
VALLEJO	1.166	16.62	5
NYC SUBURBS/LONG ISLAND	1.154	15.42	73.333
QUEENS	1.136	13.57	14
MANHATTAN	1.131	13.11	27.5
SEATTLE (KING CNTY)	1.128	12.84	21.667
DC + MD/VA SUBURBS	1.117	11.7	53.167
NORTHERN NJ	1.111	11.08	71.5
METROPOLITAN BOSTON	1.111	11.06	43
SANTA ROSA-PETALUMA	1.109	10.92	8.5
SANTA CRUZ-WATSONVILLE	1.099	9.86	5
LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH-ANAHEIM (LOS ANGELES/ORANGE CNTY)	1.097	9.7	115.167
SAN DIEGO-CHULA VISTA-CARLSBAD	1.094	9.37	31.667
OXNARD-THOUSAND OAKS-VENTURA	1.089	8.89	8
ARKANSAS	0.913	-8.69	121.167
SACRAMENTO-ROSEVILLE-FOLSOM	1.08	8.02	36.5
SANTA MARIA-SANTA BARBARA	1.078	7.79	6.833
MISSISSIPPI	0.922	-7.77	90.167
ALABAMA	0.923	-7.71	142.333

O13 · Locality Compression Risk Map

Where locality concentration risk is highest by state.

Derived support Coverage 96.33% Join success 96.33%

Locality concentration metrics are supported but remain derived context due to geographic aggregation limits.

Support: 105 of 109 entities met support thresholds.

State and locality grouping must meet minimum ZIP support
Derived concentration scores require explicit aggregation boundary

Ranked trend profile

Line chart showing ranked locality share (%) values across 24 points.

24 ranked points shown.
DE-DELAWARE has the highest locality share (%) at 100.
WY-WYOMING** has the lowest locality share (%) at 100.

Locality share (%) ranked trend table
Rank	Label	Locality share (%)
1	DE-DELAWARE	100
2	DC-DC + MD/VA SUBURBS	100
3	WV-WEST VIRGINIA	100
4	NC-NORTH CAROLINA	100
5	SC-SOUTH CAROLINA	100
6	AL-ALABAMA	100
7	TN-TENNESSEE	100
8	MS-MISSISSIPPI	100
9	KY-KENTUCKY	100
10	OH-OHIO	100
11	IN-INDIANA	100
12	IA-IOWA	100
13	WI-WISCONSIN	100
14	MN-MINNESOTA	100
15	SD-SOUTH DAKOTA**	100
16	ND-NORTH DAKOTA**	100
17	MT-MONTANA**	100
18	WK-WK-00	100
19	EK-EK-00	100
20	NE-NEBRASKA	100
21	AR-ARKANSAS	100
22	OK-OKLAHOMA	100
23	CO-COLORADO	100
24	WY-WYOMING**	100

O14 · Transparency Completeness Score

State-level transparency readiness.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

Transparency completeness scoring has full support across tracked state-level hospital records.

Support: 7,195 of 7,195 entities met support thresholds.

Hospital must have state assignment in baseline MRF index
Coverage and score fields must resolve deterministically

Composition by category

Stacked horizontal bar chart showing Published URLs and Missing URLs by category.

10 categories shown with stacked values for Published URLs and Missing URLs.
FL has the highest combined total at 292.

Published URLs and Missing URLs stacked share table
Category	Published URLs	Missing URLs	Total
PA	221	59	280
UT	43	21	64
AL	79	43	122
WI	101	59	160
NC	86	54	140
FL	186	106	292
MD	62	23	85
SC	61	35	96
ID	32	22	54
AR	72	47	119

O15 · Cost vs Chargemaster Gap View

Spread between chargemaster and cost-to-charge context.

Derived support Coverage 84.63% Join success 84.63%

Cost-to-chargemaster gap view is derived context where complete payer dimensions are unavailable.

Support: 5,132 of 6,064 entities met support thresholds.

Facility must have both cost-report and chargemaster context
Rows failing join criteria are excluded and tracked in support metrics

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Cost-to-charge ratio (%) against Median markup (%) for 24 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

24 bubble points shown.
North Shore University Hospital has the highest cost-to-charge ratio (%) at 19.59.
Cjw Medical Center has the highest median markup (%) at 1,769.86.

Cost-to-charge ratio (%) and Median markup (%) bubble chart table
Label	Cost-to-charge ratio (%)	Median markup (%)	Bubble size
Cjw Medical Center	6.36	1,769.86	6
Hca Florida North Florida Hospital	6.25	1,380.01	6
Upmc Presbyterian Shadyside	8.95	1,274.41	6
Hca Florida Ocala Hospital	6.75	1,177.77	6
Methodist Hospital	9.49	1,084.85	6
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center	11.41	1,030.55	6
St Luke's Hospital Bethlehem	9.85	915.01	6
Orlando Health Orlando Regional Medical Center	12.63	915.75	6
Lehigh Valley Hospital	13.35	776.45	6
Tampa General Hospital	15.24	751.03	6
Houston Methodist Hospital	15.71	704.87	6
Adventhealth Orlando	15.63	700.49	6
Hospital Of Univ Of Pennsylvania	14.14	674.84	6
Stanford Health Care	14.03	664.21	6
North Shore University Hospital	19.59	667.18	6
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital	18.73	653.49	6
Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Inc	17.71	651.69	6
Gulf Coast Medical Center Lee Mem Health System	18.06	628.02	6
Wellstar Kennestone Regional Medical Center	14.92	617.57	6
Sarasota Memorial Hospital	16.94	603.3	6
University Of Colorado Hospital Authority	14.59	600.44	6
Nyu Langone Hospitals	15.6	594.09	6
Baptist Medical Center Jacksonville	18.08	586.53	6
Long Island Jewish Medical Center	19.31	587.3	6

O16 · Enforcement Exposure Tracker

Enforcement pressure and publication coverage overlap.

Observed support Coverage 100.00% Join success 100.00%

Enforcement exposure has full support for tracked states with deterministic scoring inputs.

Support: 8,531 of 8,531 entities met support thresholds.

Enforcement rows require valid state and action metadata
State exposure score must include publication-coverage context

Compare two measures

Horizontal bar chart comparing All actions and Recent actions across 10 categories.

10 categories compared across All actions and Recent actions.
FL has the highest all actions at 655.
FL has the highest recent actions at 577.

All actions and Recent actions comparison table
Category	All actions	Recent actions
NV	210	171
DE	50	41
DC	43	30
NJ	235	185
VT	37	32
NH	78	48
FL	655	577
VI	3	3
CO	204	189
NC	271	247

O17 · Payer Opportunity Matrix (Proxy)

Segment opportunity proxy with payer-dimension limits disclosed.

Derived support Coverage 78.50% Join success 78.49%

Opportunity matrix is derived from proxy segment scoring where direct payer dimensions are incomplete.

Support: 4,760 of 6,064 entities met support thresholds.

Segment rows require markup and operating-margin context
Use as sequencing input, not payer-level conclusion

Distribution + intensity

Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

Bubble chart plotting Median operating margin (%) against Median markup (%) for 2 points. Bubble size represents weighted context volume.

2 bubble points shown.
Control 2 · Provider 1 has the highest median operating margin (%) at -5.88.
Control 2 · Provider 1 has the highest median markup (%) at 414.79.

Median operating margin (%) and Median markup (%) bubble chart table
Label	Median operating margin (%)	Median markup (%)	Bubble size
Control 2 · Provider 1	-5.88	414.79	33.5
Control 10 · Provider 1	-7.17	366.66	6

Interpretation boundary

These visuals are aggregate planning context and confidence-labeled support. They do not provide adjudication outcomes, payer-action predictions, or clinical appropriateness determinations.

Category	Published URLs	Missing URLs	Total
PA	221	59	280
UT	43	21	64
AL	79	43	122
WI	101	59	160
NC	86	54	140
FL	186	106	292
MD	62	23	85
SC	61	35	96
ID	32	22	54
AR	72	47	119

Category	All actions	Recent actions
NV	210	171
DE	50	41
DC	43	30
NJ	235	185
VT	37	32
NH	78	48
FL	655	577
VI	3	3
CO	204	189
NC	271	247

Category	Published URLs	Missing URLs	Total
PA	221	59	280
UT	43	21	64
AL	79	43	122
WI	101	59	160
NC	86	54	140
FL	186	106	292
MD	62	23	85
SC	61	35	96
ID	32	22	54
AR	72	47	119

Category	All actions	Recent actions
NV	210	171
DE	50	41
DC	43	30
NJ	235	185
VT	37	32
NH	78	48
FL	655	577
VI	3	3
CO	204	189
NC	271	247

Category	Published URLs	Missing URLs	Total
PA	221	59	280
UT	43	21	64
AL	79	43	122
WI	101	59	160
NC	86	54	140
FL	186	106	292
MD	62	23	85
SC	61	35	96
ID	32	22	54
AR	72	47	119

Category	All actions	Recent actions
NV	210	171
DE	50	41
DC	43	30
NJ	235	185
VT	37	32
NH	78	48
FL	655	577
VI	3	3
CO	204	189
NC	271	247