Eight-month payer IT study recognizes Cotiviti’s top client-scored achievement in claims editing, payment policy, administrative EDI and provider payment operations as health plans prepare for 2027 claims modernization, transparency and vendor replacement decisions
CHICAGO, IL / ACCESS Newswire / June 15, 2026 / Cotiviti earned the #1 client-rated position in payer claims platform performance in Black Book Research’s 2026 State of Payer Digital Technology: Managed Care and Health Plans survey, as managed care organizations prepare for a more selective 2027 buying cycle focused on claims precision, payment-policy governance, transparency, provider trust and administrative cost control.
In Black Book Research’s 2026 State of Payer Digital Technology: Managed Care and Health Plans survey, managed care and health plan clients rated Cotiviti the #1 vendor in Claims Editing, Payment Policy, Administrative EDI and Provider Payment Operations, recognizing top client-scored achievement in one of the payer market’s most financially material IT categories. Black Book’s eight-month payer IT study reflects feedback from 8,194 verified managed care and health plan respondents across 60 payer IT domains and 27 public award categories.
The claims platform category was released during AHIP26 week in Las Vegas, as payer executives, CIOs, COOs, CTOs, procurement leaders and managed care operating teams prepared for a more selective 2027 vendor evaluation cycle focused on payment accuracy, policy governance, transparency, administrative simplification, provider friction and measurable return.
“Claims is now the operational proving ground for payer technology,” said Doug Brown, Founder of Black Book Research. “The 2027 claims agenda will be defined by exact adjudication, payment-policy control, cleaner EDI, provider-facing traceability and evidence-grade automation. Health plans are not asking for another claims dashboard; they are asking whether every edit, exception, denial, adjustment and payment action can be explained, defended and improved in production.”
Claims Technology Moves from Administrative Processing to Strategic Control
The Q2 2026 survey results show payer buyers moving away from broad digital transformation claims and toward proof-based operating infrastructure. Black Book reported that payer buyers are placing greater emphasis on whether platforms, managed services and technology-enabled operations can prove measurable improvement in authorization speed, data quality, claims accuracy, member service, provider friction, compliance evidence, AI governance and cost-to-serve.
That shift is visible in claims because claims systems sit at the center of medical cost, provider payment confidence, payment integrity, audit exposure, encounter data quality, regulatory evidence and administrative unit cost. Black Book reported that 71% of payer respondents ranked claims accuracy, payment policy, payment integrity, fraud, waste and abuse, coordination of benefits, subrogation and recovery as major sources of measurable financial return.
The regulatory backdrop is also tightening. CMS’s interoperability and prior authorization requirements require impacted payers to implement Provider Access APIs for sharing individual claims and encounter data, USCDI data elements and specified prior authorization information by January 1, 2027. Transparency expectations continue to widen as health plans and issuers must make machine-readable files available with in-network rates and out-of-network allowed amounts and billed charges, increasing external scrutiny of payer data, pricing and payment operations.
Four Claims Platform Payer Priorities for 2027
Black Book’s 2026 payer IT findings point to four claims priorities shaping 2027 vendor selection:
|
2027 Claims Priority |
Why It Matters to Managed Care Organizations |
|---|---|
|
Precise claims management and adjudication |
Health plans need first-pass accuracy, payment correctness, edit discipline and fewer preventable defects. Claims accuracy, payment policy and payment integrity were ranked by 71% of respondents as major sources of measurable financial return. |
|
Provider payment traceability and lower provider friction |
Provider demands are shifting toward clearer payment rationale, faster exception handling, fewer avoidable disputes and better claims-status visibility. Black Book found 79% of payer respondents reported provider data defects create downstream operational risk. |
|
EDI, API and transaction reliability |
Claims platforms must operate cleanly across EDI, APIs, clearinghouses, payer systems and provider data flows. 82% of payer respondents cited interoperability, FHIR/API readiness and usable data exchange as essential. |
|
Auditability, transparency and controlled automation |
Payment decisions, edits, reversals, exceptions and automated workflows must be explainable and defensible. 78% of payer respondents said AI explainability, human review, monitoring and audit trails are required before expanding AI workflows. |
“The claims replacement market is becoming less tolerant of opacity,” Brown added. “When payment logic is hard to configure, EDI exceptions multiply, provider disputes rise, or AI-assisted decisions cannot be traced, the cost shows up everywhere: operations, compliance, provider relations, member service and medical-cost reporting. The strongest claims platforms in the 2026 client scoring were the ones users credited with control, explainability, speed-to-value and production reliability.”
Black Book’s 18-KPI Claims Performance Model
Across the 2025-2026 study cycle, Black Book applied its proprietary qualitative 18-KPI payer IT operational excellence framework across 60 payer IT categories. The model evaluates whether payer technology performs in production: whether it improves workflows, supports compliance, secures protected health information, integrates cleanly, reduces manual work, satisfies users, accelerates time-to-value and produces measurable financial and operational value.
In the Claims Editing, Payment Policy, Administrative EDI and Provider Payment Operations category, client scoring centered on claims-specific performance across the following qualitative KPI dimensions:
|
Claims KPI Dimension |
Client-Scored Claims Performance Meaning |
|---|---|
|
Claims functional breadth |
Coverage across claims editing, payment policy, administrative EDI, provider payment workflow, payment accuracy controls and claims-production operations. |
|
Claims workflow fit |
Alignment with payer work involving claim intake, edit review, policy application, exception routing, rework management, provider payment review and administrative resolution. |
|
Implementation performance |
Deployment discipline, configuration governance, operating readiness and stabilization without avoidable disruption to claims workflows. |
|
EDI and interoperability maturity |
Secure, accurate and scalable exchange across claims systems, clearinghouses, provider data flows and administrative transaction channels. |
|
Claims data quality and usability |
Trusted, traceable and actionable claim, member, provider, benefit, code-set, policy and payment data. |
|
Automation depth |
Reduction of manual review, rekeying, redundant touches, exception queues, reconciliation work and avoidable cycle time. |
|
AI governance and explainability |
Controlled, documented and auditable use of automation where edit logic, routing, payment recommendations or exception handling require transparency. |
|
Security posture |
Protection of claims data, PHI, provider payment information, transaction data and identity controls. |
|
Third-party transparency |
Visibility into delegated work, data dependencies, claims-processing dependencies, subcontracted functions, audit rights and operational accountability. |
|
Compliance readiness |
Support for regulatory obligations, policy updates, payment evidence, claims documentation, audit response and managed care reporting requirements. |
|
Reporting and auditability |
Traceability of edits, payment-policy applications, exceptions, reversals, provider payment actions, appeals triggers and decision history. |
|
Configurability |
Adaptability to benefit designs, payment rules, provider contracts, product lines, state requirements, reimbursement policies and plan-specific workflows. |
|
Scalability |
Claims-volume performance, including uptime, latency, batch throughput, real-time transaction handling, resilience and recovery readiness. |
|
Integration burden reduction |
Lower effort to connect, monitor, reconcile, maintain and support claims, EDI and provider payment data flows. |
|
User satisfaction |
Role-based confidence among claims executives, operations teams, payment policy staff, IT, compliance, provider operations and business users. |
|
Service responsiveness |
Claims-domain support, escalation quality, defect resolution, root-cause analysis, release readiness and operating partnership. |
|
Time-to-value |
Speed of measurable improvement in payment accuracy, workflow stability, administrative efficiency, audit readiness or claims operating performance. |
|
Total cost and value realization |
Client confidence that claims-operating value justified full cost, including implementation, integration, internal labor, support, risk controls and measurable financial return. |
Black Book’s published 18-KPI model includes functional breadth, workflow fit, implementation performance, interoperability/API maturity, data quality, automation depth, AI governance, security posture, third-party transparency, compliance readiness, reporting and auditability, configurability, scalability, integration burden, user satisfaction, service responsiveness, time-to-value and total cost/value realization.
Cotiviti’s 2026 Client-Scored Claims Achievement
Cotiviti’s #1 client-rated position reflects completed 2026 client scoring in a claims category where the operating stakes are unusually high. Claims editing and payment policy directly affect first-pass accuracy, provider abrasion, appeal volume, administrative touch rate, payment correctness, audit exposure, medical-cost visibility and downstream financial and regulatory reporting.
The client-scored result indicates that payer users credited Cotiviti with category-leading performance in the claims functions Black Book measured: payment policy execution, edit governance, administrative EDI reliability, provider payment workflow support, claims data usability, operational auditability, configurability, service responsiveness and measurable value realization. Black Book’s public category listing identifies Cotiviti as the 2026 #1 client-rated vendor for Claims Editing, Payment Policy, Administrative EDI and Provider Payment Operations.
About Black Book Research
Black Book Research provides independent healthcare technology and services market research based on validated client experience, operational performance and category-specific vendor scoring. Black Book surveys healthcare financial, operational, technical and executive leaders across hospitals, health systems, physician organizations, payers, managed care organizations and healthcare technology markets.
Black Book’s payer IT rankings are independently managed and vendor-agnostic. Vendors do not participate in ballot collection, respondent validation, KPI scoring, category assignment or ranking calculation. Black Book states that no vendor commission, sponsorship, consulting relationship, paid submission or participation fee is used to generate award results. The results are client-rated category findings and should not be interpreted as procurement recommendations, paid endorsements or vendor-controlled reference outcomes.
Media Contact:
Black Book Research https://www.blackbookmarketresearch.com
research@blackbookmarketresearch.com
1 800-863-7590
SOURCE: Black Book Research
View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire
Media gallery
