Methodology and editorial standards

Verdict Consulting Group is a data and analytics consultancy focused on No Surprises Act and health care litigation. We help provider groups and their counsel understand what happened in the federal independent dispute resolution (IDR) process — which determinations were won, which were paid, and which were not.

We are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice.

Client analyses begin with a written scope agreed with counsel. We work from de-identified determination, remittance and claim-code data, document every transformation, and keep each step reproducible so that a result can be re-derived and examined.

Where an analysis depends on a judgment — how to treat a partial payment, or which deadline governs — we state the assumption and show how the result changes under the alternative.

Every published insight, answer and case summary cites at least one public source, listed on the page. Our publishing system will not build a page without one.

We prefer primary sources: court opinions and dockets, the Federal Register, statutes and official CMS publications. Secondary trackers are cited as such. Figures are reported as published, with their date range, and are never extrapolated.

Research is published under the byline Verdict Consulting Group Research. Some drafts are prepared with AI assistance; every page must pass the same sourcing checks before it can be published.

When we get something wrong, we fix it and update the page's “Updated” date. Material corrections — a changed holding, figure or date — are noted on the page.

To report an error, use the corrections form with the page and the source that supports the correction. Do not include protected health information.