img

Care Decoded Insights | RADV Audits Are Changing the Rules for Every Medicare Advantage Plan

CMS has made one thing clear: RADV audits are no longer occasional events—they are becoming a standard expectation.

In episode six of Care Decoded, host Mark McKeown sits down with Colleen Gianatasio, a leading expert in risk adjustment and coding compliance, to unpack what CMS’s expanded RADV strategy means for Medicare Advantage plans, provider organizations, and anyone involved in value-based care.

The message is simple: audit readiness is no longer a reactive exercise. It has to be built into how organizations operate every day.

What CMS’s RADV Expansion Really Means

CMS is moving toward auditing all eligible Medicare Advantage contracts on a recurring basis. That shift fundamentally changes how plans need to think about compliance.

RADV is no longer:

  • a periodic risk
  • a back-office function
  • or something reserved for large plans

It is now:

  • a continuous operational requirement
  • a financial exposure measured in millions
  • a system-wide responsibility

For many organizations, this creates immediate pressure—not just to respond to audits, but to prove that documentation, coding, and risk adjustment processes are accurate at scale.

Why RADV Risk Is Increasing Now

RADV pressure is increasing because the system itself has grown more complex.

As value-based care expands, more organizations are:

  • managing larger populations
  • relying on risk adjustment revenue
  • scaling coding and documentation processes

But many have not scaled their compliance infrastructure at the same pace.

Colleen highlights a critical gap: organizations often invest in growth and performance metrics, but underinvest in the systems needed to validate that performance.

The result is predictable:

  • inconsistent documentation
  • unsupported diagnoses
  • weak audit defense
  • increased exposure under RADV

The Biggest Misconception About RADV Readiness

One of the most important insights from episode six is this:

Many organizations still treat RADV as an event instead of a system.

That mindset leads to:

  • scrambling after audit notices arrive
  • building temporary teams instead of sustainable processes
  • focusing on cleanup instead of prevention

Colleen makes it clear that successful organizations take a different approach. They build audit readiness into their structure—before they ever receive a request.

What an Effective RADV Readiness Strategy Looks Like

RADV readiness requires coordination across the organization, not just within risk adjustment teams.

Colleen describes a model that functions more like a “SWAT team,” bringing together:

  • risk adjustment and coding
  • clinical leadership
  • provider engagement teams
  • compliance and legal
  • operations and data teams

This group must be aligned on:

  • documentation standards
  • coding accuracy
  • audit workflows
  • escalation paths

The goal is not just to respond to audits—but to ensure the organization is always prepared for one.

Why Documentation Fails Under RADV

Most RADV failures are not random—they follow predictable patterns.

Common issues include:

Unsupported diagnoses
Conditions are documented without sufficient clinical evidence.

Carry-forward errors
Diagnoses are copied forward year over year without validation.

Vague documentation
Notes lack specificity or clarity needed to support coding.

Provider knowledge gaps
Clinicians are not fully aligned with coding requirements, especially around documentation standards.

Colleen also highlights an important distinction:
coders and providers often operate with different frameworks. Coders may rely on structured rules, while providers document clinically. Bridging that gap is critical for audit success.

Why Retrospective Fixes Are No Longer Enough

A major theme in episode six is the limitation of retrospective workflows.

Retrospective strategies:

  • identify issues after the fact
  • require significant manual effort
  • increase operational cost
  • introduce compliance risk

More importantly, they don’t prevent errors—they only attempt to fix them.

That’s why leading organizations are shifting toward prospective approaches, where issues are addressed at the point of care.

How AI and Prospective Tools Improve RADV Outcomes

Technology plays a central role in this transition—but only when used correctly.

Colleen and Mark emphasize that effective tools must:

  • reduce provider burden, not increase it
  • surface accurate, clinically relevant insights
  • integrate into existing workflows
  • improve documentation before submission

AI is particularly valuable in:

  • identifying unsupported diagnoses early
  • improving documentation specificity
  • reducing noise in coding workflows
  • helping organizations move from reactive to proactive models

The shift is not just about automation—it’s about improving the quality of inputs before they reach CMS.

What Leaders Should Be Doing Right Now

For organizations navigating RADV changes, the priorities are clear:

  • Build compliance into everyday operations
  • Invest in provider education around documentation
  • Strengthen collaboration between clinical and coding teams
  • Improve data quality and governance
  • Reduce reliance on retrospective fixes
  • Adopt prospective tools that support accuracy at the point of care

Colleen reinforces a key principle:

If you focus on accuracy, the rest follows.

That includes:

  • audit performance
  • financial outcomes
  • and long-term sustainability

Key Takeaways

  • RADV audits are becoming a standard expectation, not a rare event
  • Audit readiness must be built into operations, not treated as a project
  • Most failures come from predictable documentation and coding issues
  • Retrospective cleanup is no longer sufficient
  • Prospective workflows and AI tools are critical for reducing risk
  • Strong collaboration across teams is essential
  • Accuracy—not volume—should be the focus of risk adjustment

FAQ

What is a RADV audit in Medicare Advantage?

A RADV (Risk Adjustment Data Validation) audit is a CMS review process that verifies whether diagnoses submitted by health plans are supported by medical record documentation.

Why is CMS increasing RADV audits?

CMS is expanding RADV audits to improve payment accuracy, reduce unsupported diagnoses, and ensure that risk adjustment reflects true patient complexity.

What are the most common RADV audit failures?

The most common failures include unsupported diagnoses, copied documentation, vague clinical notes, and lack of specificity in coding.

How can health plans prepare for RADV audits?

Plans can prepare by improving documentation accuracy, investing in provider education, strengthening compliance workflows, and adopting prospective tools that catch issues early.

Contact Inferscience to learn about our RADV-readiness solutions and more.