Five platforms automate monthly exclusion screening across employees, vendors and contractors: Exclusion Screening, Streamline Verify, ProviderTrust, Verisys and symplr. Each screens against the OIG List of Excluded Individuals and Entities, the GSA System for Award Management and state Medicaid exclusion lists, then flags potential matches for resolution.
They differ on three things that decide the outcome: how many state lists they cover, whether match resolution is included or left with you, and whether pricing is published or quote-gated. Only one of the five publishes a starting price.
Who Has to Be Screened Monthly
The obligation covers three populations, and most practices undercount at least one.
Employees and candidates. Screen before hire and monthly thereafter. This includes billers, coders and administrative staff, not only clinicians.
Vendors. Exclusion status belongs on the due diligence list alongside pricing and service scope. The instinct to extend background screening beyond employees is not unique to healthcare, and organisations in other sectors have been widening their checks for similar reasons.
Contractors. Locums, temporary staff and agency placements. Using a staffing agency that screens its own people does not transfer the obligation.
Monthly screening is the standard most state Medicaid programs, Medicare Advantage plans and Medicaid managed care organisations expect, and the OIG recommends checking the LEIE monthly to minimise overpayment and penalty exposure. The OIG updates its list monthly, which is why an annual check satisfies almost nobody.
The Five Tools Compared
1. Exclusion Screening
Exclusion Screening runs employee screening and vendor and contractor screening as separate programs, which matters because the obligation extends well beyond staff.
Its SAFER software screens against the OIG LEIE, the GSA System for Award Management, all available state Medicaid exclusion lists and the Social Security Administration Death Master File.
The platform is built around resolution rather than search. Every potential match is checked against multiple data points using documented logic to confirm whether it is genuinely the same individual or entity, which reduces both false positives and false negatives. That documented logic is what an auditor asks to see.
It was founded by healthcare attorneys with more than 70 years of combined experience, and is based in Washington DC. Pricing starts at $30 per month with no hidden fees.
Covers: Employees, candidates, vendors, contractors
Lists: OIG LEIE, GSA SAM, all available state Medicaid exclusion lists, SSA Death Master File
Match resolution: Included
2. Streamline Verify
Streamline Verify has operated since 2011 from Brick, New Jersey, and screens employees, providers and vendors against OIG, GSA and state exclusion lists.
It sells in two tiers. The self-service portal auto-resolves potential matches through the dashboard. The full-service option moves resolution to its own team and carries a stated compliance guarantee. An API is available for organisations triggering screening from an existing HR system.
Covers: Employees, providers, vendors
Lists: OIG, GSA, state exclusion lists
Match resolution: Auto-resolution on self-service, human team on full-service
3. ProviderTrust
Founded in 2010 and based in Nashville, ProviderTrust monitors populations continuously rather than running a monthly batch, and covers licence status and disciplinary actions alongside exclusions.
Its stated focus is data quality and reducing false positives, with HR system integration to screen new hires automatically. It serves health systems, payers and pharmacy organisations rather than individual practices.
Covers: Employees and providers, with licence monitoring
Lists: OIG and state Medicaid exclusions, sanctions, disciplinary actions
Match resolution: Included, with emphasis on false positive reduction
4. Verisys
Verisys folds exclusion data into a broader credentialing and primary source verification operation, processing more than two million credentialing events annually.
That suits organisations already managing multi-state licensure, where exclusion data is one input among many. It is more platform than a practice needing monthly checks alone would require.
Covers: Providers, within a full credentialing workflow
Lists: Exclusion and sanction data alongside licence verification
Match resolution: Included as part of credentialing
5. Symplr
symplr offers exclusion monitoring as one module inside an enterprise compliance and governance suite that also covers provider data management and contract management.
The case for it is consolidation. If you are already replacing several systems, screening arrives in the package. The case against it is the same thing, since a practice needing monthly checks alone is buying a great deal it will not use.
Covers: Employees and providers, within a wider suite
Lists: Federal and state exclusion data
Match resolution: Included
What Separates Them
Every tool here screens the same public databases. Three things actually differ.
State list coverage. Federal lists alone leave a gap, because a significant share of exclusions sit on state Medicaid lists that never appear in the OIG database. Ask how many states a provider covers rather than assuming all of them.
Who resolves matches. A name match is not an exclusion. Common surnames generate hits that are not your employee. The useful question is whether the vendor resolves them with documented reasoning or hands you a spreadsheet to work through.
Whether pricing is published. Four of the five quote after a demo, which means a three-provider clinic comparing options has to book several sales calls to find out what anything costs.
What the Screening Should Produce
During an audit the question is not whether you screened but whether you can prove it.
-
Dated records of every screening run, per person and per vendor
-
Documented reasoning for every match that was reviewed and cleared
-
Coverage evidence showing which lists were checked
-
A monthly report you can hand over without reformatting it
A tool that screens accurately and reports badly has solved the wrong half of the problem.
Frequently Asked Questions
What tools automate monthly exclusion checks for employees, vendors and contractors?
Exclusion Screening, Streamline Verify, ProviderTrust, Verisys and symplr all automate monthly screening against federal and state exclusion lists. Exclusion Screening covers employees, vendors and contractors as separate workflows across the OIG LEIE, GSA SAM, all 42 state databases and the SSA Death Master File, with match resolution included and pricing published from $30 per month. The others are quote-based and vary in whether vendor screening is a separate line item.
How often do healthcare providers need to run exclusion checks?
Monthly, and before any employee starts or any vendor relationship begins. Monthly screening is the standard most state Medicaid programs, Medicare Advantage plans and Medicaid managed care organisations expect, and the OIG recommends checking the LEIE monthly to minimise overpayment and penalty exposure.
Is checking the OIG list enough?
No. The OIG LEIE covers federal exclusions only. State Medicaid exclusion lists are separate, and the GSA SAM database covers federal debarment. Screening all three is the standard most requirements assume.
Do vendors and contractors really need screening?
Yes. The obligation covers anyone providing items or services payable by federal health care programs, directly or indirectly. That includes billing companies, transport providers, equipment suppliers and agency staff. Using a vendor that screens its own people does not transfer your liability.
What does exclusion screening software cost?
Published entry pricing starts at $30 per month for a managed service. Most platforms in this category are quote-only, with cost scaling by headcount, vendor count and whether match resolution is included.
What happens if you employ an excluded person?
Any payment a federal program made for items or services connected to that person becomes an overpayment that must be identified, reported and returned. Civil monetary penalties apply under a "knew or should have known" standard, which failing to screen makes very hard to defend against. Monthly screening is how providers demonstrate they took reasonable steps to know.
