CYBX Outcomes

Reporting built from your data, across every view your practice needs.

Three sample report sets: executive dashboards for leadership, value-based care reporting for post-acute and long-term care, and fee-for-service reporting for billing and revenue cycle teams. Pick one below, or use the tabs.

CFO · CMO · Operations

Executive Reporting

A selection of executive dashboards across the CFO, CMO, and operations views: net collections, A/R aging, payer mix, denials, clinical performance, and staff productivity.

View reports →
Population · Utilization · Quality

Value-Based Care Reporting

A selection of reports for provider organizations operating in post-acute and long-term care: population risk, avoidable ER visits, readmission risk, incident tracking, and revenue integrity.

View reports →
Denials · Cost-to-collect · Funnel

Fee-for-Service Reporting

A selection of sample flagship reports for fee-for-service practices: avoidable vs. unavoidable denials, cost-to-collect per denied dollar, telehealth/POS audit, and the intake-to-engagement funnel.

View reports →
CYBX Value-Based Care Analytics: Report Preview
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative and synthetic. Live reports populate from your PointClickCare, MatrixCare, and other clinical and billing feeds.
VBC REPORT 01 · POPULATION · DEMOGRAPHICS

Patient demographics overview

Age, gender, payer mix, and primary psychiatric diagnosis across the network. Value-based contracts price risk on population shape, so this is the baseline every downstream outcome measure is read against.
FY2026 Q2
N=462 · 5 facilities
All facilities reporting
Total patients
462
↑ 14 vs Q4
All facilities
Avg age
74.2 yrs
→ Stable
Geriatric population
Female
58.4%
270 patients
Of total census
Dx documented
98.1%
↑ 0.4pp
Primary psych dx
Age distribution
Nearly three in five patients are 75 or older; acuity and fall risk both track this curve.
55-64
12%
65-74
28%
75-84
38%
85-94
18%
95+
4%
Payer mix
Medicare and Medicaid carry 82% of the census; dual-eligible patients are the highest-touch cohort.
Primary psychiatric diagnosis: top 6
Diagnosis mix drives the acuity and utilization profiles in VBC reports 02 and 04.
Major depression
31%
Dementia + behavioral
24%
Bipolar disorder
16%
Schizophrenia
12%
Anxiety
10%
PTSD / other
7%
Key insight:
The census is geriatric and dementia-weighted: 56% of patients are 75 or older and dementia with behavioral disturbance is the second most common primary diagnosis. Under a value-based contract this combination concentrates risk in falls and behavioral crisis, which is exactly where VBC reports 04 and 07 measure leakage.
Synthetic sample data for illustration. Live value-based care reporting draws from MDS assessments, PointClickCare and MatrixCare clinical feeds, and payer authorization data through the CYBX integration layer.
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative and synthetic.
VBC REPORT 02 · POPULATION · ACUITY

Primary psychiatric diagnosis prevalence

Diagnosis frequency, monthly trend, acuity tier, and comorbidity patterns.
FY2026 Q2
N=462
6 diagnosis groups
Top diagnosis
Major depression
31% of census
143 patients
Fastest growing
Dementia + behav.
↑ 3.2pp QoQ
111 patients
Comorbidity rate
62.4%
≥2 psych dx
Risk-adjustment driver
Undocumented dx
1.9%
9 patients; gap
Closeable this quarter
Diagnosis prevalence and acuity profile
ER risk is the share of each diagnosis cohort with at least one emergency visit in the quarter.
DiagnosisPatientsAcuityER riskStatus
Major depression143Moderate9.2%Strong
Dementia + behavioral111High11.8%Watch
Bipolar disorder74High14.8%Watch
Schizophrenia55Very high21.4%High Risk
Anxiety disorders46Moderate6.1%Strong
PTSD33Moderate8.4%Strong
Top co-occurring diagnosis pairs
Primary + secondary pairCount% of primary
Major depression + anxiety6847.6%
Dementia + major depression5448.6%
Bipolar + anxiety4155.4%
Schizophrenia + substance use2850.9%
PTSD + major depression2266.7%
Dementia + anxiety1917.1%
Key insight:
Comorbidity is the story: 62.4% of patients carry two or more psychiatric diagnoses.
Synthetic sample data for illustration.
Sample report.
VBC REPORT 03 · POPULATION · BENCHMARKING

Facility and location performance comparison

Cross-facility benchmarking on census, acuity, PHQ-9 change, gradual dose reduction, and incidents.
FY2026 Q2
5 facilities
Census 462
Top performer
Facility A
PHQ-9 Δ -6.9 pts
Best symptom reduction
Needs attention
Facility B
GDR gap: 38 patients
Documentation shortfall
Network census
462
5 facilities reporting
Complete submission
Data complete
98.1%
↑ 0.4pp vs Q4
Field-level completeness
Cross-facility key metrics: FY2026 Q2
FacilityCensusAvg acuityPHQ-9 ΔGDR %Incident / 1K30-day rdmAuth noteER rateStatus
Facility A94High-6.944%2.99.8%94%7.9%Strong
Facility B88Very high-4.128%5.116.2%72%23.5%Watch
Facility C102Moderate-6.441%3.211.4%88%9.8%Strong
Facility D91High-6.839%3.812.1%84%13.9%Stable
Facility E87Very high-5.131%4.713.8%78%22.9%Watch
Incident rate against GDR documentation
Symptom reduction by facility
Key insight:
Facility B's high incident rate (5.1 per 1,000 resident days) and low GDR documentation (28%) are co-occurring.
Synthetic sample data for illustration.
Sample report.
VBC REPORT 04 · UTILIZATION · AVOIDABLE COST

Avoidable ER visit tracking

Crisis flags, disposition, cost impact, and repeat-visitor risk.
FY2026 Q2
127 ER visits
All facilities
Total ER visits
127
Q1 all facilities
Behavioral and medical
Avoidable visits
18
14.2% of total
Flagged behavioral
Est. avoidable cost
$94K
Q1 attributed
Avoidable ER spend
Repeat ER visitors
31 pts
≥2 visits in Q1
24.4% of visitors
Avoidable visit reasons and facility source
Agitation / aggression
8 visits
Suicidal ideation
4 visits
Medication non-compliance
3 visits
Fall / injury
2 visits
Other behavioral
1 visit
Avoidable share of total ER volume
Repeat ER visitor risk factors
Risk factorRepeatersNon-repeatSignal
On antipsychotic84%58%High
Schizophrenia dx48%19%High
GDR not documented71%44%Moderate
PHQ-9 >15 at admit61%38%Moderate
No aftercare plan74%41%High
Fall risk score >1039%28%Low
Key insight:
Absence of an aftercare plan is the single widest gap at 33 points.
Synthetic sample data for illustration.
CYBX Fee-For-Service Analytics: Report Preview
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative. Live reports populate from your practice management, EHR, and clearinghouse feeds.
FFS REPORT 01 · DENIALS · ROOT CAUSE

Avoidable vs unavoidable denials

Two-thirds of FFS denials are preventable if you catch them upstream. CYBX classifies every denial by root cause and tells you where in the workflow to fix it.
Last 90 days
Practice: Lakeside Health (sample practice)
14 clinicians · $9.8M annualized
Total denials
$487K
+12% vs prior 90d
Avoidable
$361K
74% of denials
Prevented this period
$94K
CYBX upstream catches
Unavoidable
$126K
payer + medical necessity
Denials by root cause
Avoidable bucket is fixable through process and AI. Unavoidable bucket feeds payer renegotiation.
AVOIDABLE 75%
UNAVOIDABLE 25%
Where to fix it
Each avoidable bucket maps to a specific workflow shift.
01
Eligibility / VOB error · 28%
Catch at intake. Real-time eligibility check before scheduling.
02
Missing or expired auth · 19%
Concurrent review countdown. Alerts 14 days before expiry.
03
Modifier or POS mismatch · 13%
AI flag on submission. Telehealth modifier audit (Report 03).
04
Untimely filing · 8%
Notes-not-locked aging triggers escalation to clinician.
05
Coding / documentation · 7%
Pattern detection on prior denials. Pre-submission flag.
Top denials by payer + root cause
Click any row to drill to claim-level detail. Action column drives the billing manager's worklist priority.
PayerRoot causeBucketClaimsDollarsRecommended action
Aetna CommercialEligibility / VOB errorAvoidable87$54,210Intake VOB process review
BCBS PPOMissing or expired authAvoidable62$41,880Auth tracker auto-alerts
UHC Optum BHModifier or POS mismatchAvoidable119$37,605Telehealth audit (Report 03)
Cigna BehavioralMedical necessityUnavoidable28$22,440Appeal + parity evidence
Medicaid (state)Untimely filingAvoidable71$18,920Notes-not-locked escalation
Aetna CommercialRetroactive eligibility termUnavoidable15$11,250Patient outreach + write-off
Key insight:
75 percent of denial dollars are sitting in the avoidable bucket. Fixing the top three root causes (eligibility, auth, modifiers) recovers an estimated $133K per quarter without touching the appeals queue.
Sample data shown for illustration. Benchmarks: AMA, PIMSY, BillingParadise, MGMA. CYBX classification model trained on practice-specific denial history plus published payer remit code patterns.
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative. Live reports populate from your practice management, EHR, and clearinghouse feeds.
FFS REPORT 02 · DENIALS · RECOVERY ECONOMICS

Cost-to-collect per denied dollar

When working a denial costs more than recovering it, the math says write off. CYBX makes the call explicit by claim, by payer, by dollar size.
Last 90 days
Practice: Lakeside Health (sample practice)
2,847 denied claims this period
Avg cost per recovered $
$0.37
$0.50 = write-off threshold
Denial recovery rate
62%
+8 pts vs baseline
Recovered this period
$215K
on $361K avoidable
Smart-write-off saved
$28K
staff time redirected
Claims by dollar size vs work effort
Above the dashed line, work the claim. Below, write off. Threshold tunable per payer.
This week's recommendation
Math-driven triage for the billing manager.
Work these claims
412 claims
$184,200 expected recovery at avg $0.31 cost-to-collect.
Write off
237 claims
$8,940 face value at avg $0.71 cost-to-collect.
PayerThresholdRecovery rate
Aetna Commercial$0.4271%
BCBS PPO$0.3868%
UHC Optum BH$0.5154%
Cigna Behavioral$0.4561%
Medicaid (state)$0.6242%
Key insight:
Smart triage redirects staff time from low-margin small claims to the high-yield avoidable bucket. Net effect: recovery rate climbs while total recovery cost falls.
Sample data shown for illustration. CYBX recommendation engine factors: avg appeal cycle time per payer, historical reversal rate by denial code, billing manager hourly fully-loaded cost. Calibration: MGMA "Beyond Days in A/R", HFMA cost-to-collect benchmarks.
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative. Live reports populate from your practice management, EHR, and clearinghouse feeds.
FFS REPORT 03 · PREVENTION · TELEHEALTH

Telehealth modifier and POS audit

Place of service 02 vs 10 swings $58 per visit. Modifier 95 vs 93 plus state parity rules drive 30 to 40 percent of telehealth claim failures. CYBX flags every mismatch before submission.
Last 30 days
Practice: Lakeside Health (sample practice)
1,824 telehealth claims audited
Mismatches detected
183
10% of telehealth volume
$ at risk
$10.6K
avg $58/visit on POS
Caught pre-submission
156
85% prevention rate
Recovered post-denial
$8.2K
26 claims, modifier appeal
Modifier compliance by payer
Heat map of compliance rate per payer per modifier rule. Red cells are payer-specific gotchas that CYBX flags pre-submission.
PAYER
POS 10 home
POS 02 elsewhere
Mod 95 A/V
Mod 93 audio
State parity
Aetna Commercial
98%
96%
99%
71%
94%
BCBS PPO
95%
68%
97%
89%
73%
UHC Optum BH
42%
61%
93%
38%
58%
Cigna Behavioral
91%
88%
94%
76%
90%
Medicaid (state)
74%
86%
95%
88%
44%
85% or above
50-84%
Below 50%
Open mismatches this week
Worklist for the billing manager. CYBX has staged the corrected submission for review.
DatePatient IDClinicianPayerDetected issue$ at riskCYBX recommendation
Apr 28PT-4821Dr. MehtaUHC Optum BHPOS 02 used, patient at home$58Resubmit POS 10
Apr 28PT-3047L. Park, LCSWBCBS PPOMod 95 on audio-only session$112Change to Mod 93, resubmit
Apr 27PT-5892Dr. MehtaUHC Optum BHAudio-only without Mod 93$112Add Mod 93, resubmit
Apr 26PT-2113R. Daniels, LMFTMedicaid (NY)State parity rule: in-state requirement$84Verify provider state license
Apr 25PT-4109L. Park, LCSWAetna CommercialMod 93 on synchronous session$96Change to Mod 95, resubmit
Key insight:
UHC Optum BH compliance is the largest exposure: POS 10 at 42% and Mod 93 at 38%. Targeted training plus pre-submission rule overlay closes the gap before submission.
Sample data shown for illustration. Sources: CMS Telehealth FAQ Feb 2026, CY2026 PFS final rule. State parity rules tracked across all 50 states with payer-specific overlays. CYBX rule library updates monthly.
Sample report. Figures shown are illustrative. Live reports populate from your practice management, EHR, and clearinghouse feeds.
FFS REPORT 04 · ENGAGEMENT

Intake-to-engagement funnel

Most dashboards stop at no-show rate and miss the funnel above and below it. Of 100 inquiries, only 20 stay active at 90 days. Marketing spend and capacity decisions ride on this view.
Last 90 days
Practice: Lakeside Health (sample practice)
342 new inquiries this period
Inquiries
342
+18% vs prior 90d
Intake completed
178
52% conversion
First treatment session
119
35% of inquiries
Active at 90 days
71
21% (vs 20% benchmark)
Funnel
Industry benchmark: 100 / 50 / 33 / 20. Lakeside is performing slightly above benchmark on intake conversion, slightly below on first-session conversion.
Inquiries
342
52% intake conversion (benchmark 50%)
Intake (90791)
178
67% to first session (benchmark 66%)
First treatment session
119
60% retention to 90 days (benchmark 60%)
Active at 90 days
71
Where dropoff is happening
Days from inquiry to next stage. Long waits drive dropoff.
Conversion by referral source
Drives marketing spend allocation. CYBX attributes inquiries through admission and computes cost-per-active-patient by channel.
Referral sourceInquiriesIntakeFirst sessionActive 90dEnd-to-end conv.Status
Direct PCP referral9461483133%Strong
EAP partner (Lyra)7152391825%On-benchmark
Self-referral / web883115910%Investigate
Payer directory431911716%Below avg
Existing patient referral31115516%Small sample
Court / court-ordered154117%Reassess
Key insight:
Self-referral / web is the largest inquiry source but the weakest converter. Speed-to-lead automation closes the gap; expect a 2x improvement on intake conversion within 30 days of activation.
Sample data shown for illustration. Benchmarks: Hamm Clinic Attrition in Psychotherapy survival analysis, APA dropout meta-analysis, Mend BH no-show research.