For compliance and COI offices
You carry the duty. We carry the cycle. Pick your roster, launch, and the requests go out prefilled from the public federal record. The reminders run on your cadence. The cycle closes into a packet you can hand to a committee.
The part we cannot do is make anyone reply. You already can, and that is the entire arrangement: your authority, our legwork, one record at the end.
A product cannot require a physician to disclose. An employer under a federal duty can. That is the whole reason this works at an institution and stalls everywhere else.
Thousands of U.S. hospitals already have their public record on a page, in every state. Find your hospital and see what a committee would look at first.
Every cycle, several hundred clinicians are asked to reconstruct a year of relationships from memory and retype them into a form. An hour each, across a thousand people, is most of a full time year spent re-entering things that are already written down somewhere.
Somebody sends the first request, then the reminders, then the escalations, then builds the spreadsheet of who has not replied. That work scales with the roster and produces nothing except a completed roster.
A form returned blank looks identical to a form returned by someone with nothing to report. Without a baseline to compare against, a completed cycle and an accurate one are the same document.
Everything between the moves is ours: the sending, the reminding, the measuring, the record keeping. Nothing sends until you say launch, and everything that sends is on the cadence you chose.
Your roster is already matched against the public federal payment record, so the pick starts from the physicians who actually have payments to account for. Take the whole roster or choose a subset. The pick is yours, and it freezes when you launch, so the denominator cannot move under the committee mid cycle.
Nothing sends while you are still setting up. When you launch, every covered physician with an address on file gets the request that day, and each one opens a record already filled from the federal file. Reviewing a prefilled record is a different task from remembering a year.
The programme reminds the people who have not responded, on the schedule you set, and leaves everyone else alone. Reminders stop at the deadline. A physician who asked for quiet gets quiet. None of the chasing lands back on your team.
One document: attainment against the targets you set, each physician's final state, every reminder dated, the whole cycle's history. It is written once when you close and never edited afterwards, which is what lets a committee and an auditor rely on it.
Our own commitments, the ones about uptime and data freshness and delivery, are contract terms and carry credits. The response targets are different: they are your commitment about your own physicians. We will not guarantee them, because they are behaviour we do not control, and a vendor promising you your own staff's compliance is selling something it cannot deliver. What we do is make the number real, visible and defensible while the cycle is still open.
The physician affirms their record is complete as of a date. What gets stored alongside it is computed on our side from their own ledger, not typed by them, so the numbers attested to cannot be authored to suit the attestation. Timestamped and never rewritten afterwards.
A research grant routed to your institution is not personal income, and totalling the two together overstates a conflict that was never personal. Every figure separates them, including on the attestation record you keep.
Once a month your office gets a short note: what the programme watched, what moved, what did not. A quiet month is not silence to a compliance office. It is the record that someone looked.
Registered, sharing, attested, measured against the targets you set. The denominator is the physicians with reported payments in the cycle you launched, not the whole roster, so the figure means something and cannot be flattered by padding.
The institution's commitment
A hospital has to account for what its physicians were paid by industry. It has the standing to ask. What it does not have is a list of who has not answered.
PayClear does not create that leverage. It gives you the evidence to use the leverage you already have. You set the commitment. We measure it against the roster, remind the people who have not answered, and turn the result into an exhibit a committee reads.
We do not promise your physicians respond. Nobody controls that. We show you who has and who has not, while there is still time to do something about it.
24 on roster · 9 with payments on the public record
| Physician | Records | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Physician 01 | 31 | Pending |
| Physician 02 | 24 | Pending |
| Physician 03 | 18 | Pending |
| Physician 04 | 12 | Pending |
| Physician 05 | 9 | Pending |
| Physician 06 | 7 | Pending |
| Physician 07 | 6 | Pending |
| Physician 08 | 4 | Pending |
| Physician 09 | 2 | Pending |
Attested
6/967%
Target 80%
Three have not answered. Each is reminded on your cadence while the period is open. After the due date the reminders stop and it becomes a conversation for your committee, not an automated one.
Why they answer
Every disclosure form asks the same questions in a different order. A physician fills them in again and again, from memory, and the answers drift. On PayClear they hold one record. The forms are views of it.
Add a relationship once and it is on file for every disclosure after this one. The next form is a review, not a memory test.
A compliance rollout fails on the medical staff, not on the committee. So the physician side is not a portal we make them use. It is theirs.
It is free to them, permanently, and it stays theirs when they move institutions. They maintain one record and answer you from it, instead of rebuilding the same list for you, for a journal, and for the next employer.
Your dashboard shows the public federal record for your roster, plus the record of any physician who has granted you access to it. That grant is theirs to give and theirs to revoke, and it covers their verified record rather than a subset they curate for you. A physician who reads that sentence and believes it is a physician who registers.
The same record produces the disclosure statement they paste into a manuscript. The cycle stops being pure overhead the first time it saves them an hour on a submission.
PayClear does not hold funds and takes no share of any payment a physician receives. We are a record, not a payment processor, and that is a structural fact about how the product is built rather than a policy we could change later.
Right now you are the office that sends the reminder and then chases it. Disclosure arrives in a clinician's inbox as an interruption with a deadline attached, and nothing they get back is any use to them.
The record you are buying is free to every physician on your roster, permanently, and it is theirs rather than yours. It answers the journal submission they have open, the IRB form next month, and the onboarding pack at the next institution they join. So the email changes from please complete this again to we have set this up for you, and it will save you the next one.
You are still the office with the federal duty and the authority to require an answer. You are simply no longer asking for something and offering nothing back.
Priced on the number of physicians under your COI policy, so it tracks the population you actually have to file for. Never on findings, payment volume or response rates. A fee that rose with findings would give us a reason to manufacture them.
It is a monthly subscription, not a licence. That is a deliberate difference and it is usually the part that decides whether this happens this year: recurring software is operational spend, so it does not go down the capital approval path a perpetual licence does. A roster of 347 or fewer pays the floor, which is most departments and institutes.
| Roster | Monthly | Per year | What it is |
|---|---|---|---|
Department / Institute Up to 347 physicians | $4,166.67 | $50,000.04 | The floor. Every roster this size pays the same |
Cancer centre 600 physicians | $7,200.00 | $86,400.00 | First size where the roster, not the floor, sets the price |
Academic medical centre 1,041 physicians | $12,492.00 | $149,904.00 | Where institutional attention begins, at about $150K |
Large academic centre 2,000 physicians | $24,000.00 | $288,000.00 | Priced per physician, like every row below the floor is not |
Health system 4,260 physicians | $51,120.00 | $613,440.00 | A multi hospital system, every physician priced |
The monthly figures are what you are invoiced, and the yearly column is simply twelve of them. That is where the four cents on the floor comes from: $50,000 does not divide into whole cents, and we round the month up rather than down, so the price you are quoted is never lower than the price you pay.
These are list prices and they hold. We do not discount, including for institutions where someone here has a relationship, because a negotiated rate is exactly what makes a compliance purchase look like something other than a compliance purchase. The count is set when you sign and fixed for the term, so the figure cannot move under you mid-year.
The roster, the federal prefill, the guided cycle, the attestation record and the evidence packet are built and running. No institution is live on it yet, and we would rather say so than imply a queue or a reference account we do not have. What that means for you in practice: you would be first, the defaults are still cheap to argue with, and the price above is the price either way.
Worth a conversation? michael@payclear.health