Case Study: 45 bed LTAC decreases referral review time and improves revenues by implementing the Vindicet Patient Match referral management system.

1. Vindicet Patient Matching System™Case Study: 45 Bed LTAC Benefits from Strategic Approach to Referral Screening

2. Vindicet Patient Match Product Overview Vindicet Patient Match helps LTACs, SNFs and IRFs increase revenue and decrease operating expenses through smart online referral management “Admitting the Appropriate patient” 2 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential

3. Vindicet Patient Match Product Overview 3 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential Vindicet Patient Match improves financial cash flow and medical outcomes: Collects whatever Clinical, Marketing and Financial data your organization wants Faster and more efficient pre-admission process Better clinical outcome using a criteria-based Clinical Decision Support tool Provides reports for Hospital resource Planning

4. Case Study: Background 4 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential An established LTAC hospital, part of a large regional healthcare network and well regarded in the community for its clinical outcomes was watching its admission rates fall. The previous year the hospital had established a rigorous preadmission screening process and the program was generally considered to be a success. A mobile team of 5 clinical nurse evaluators equipped with laptops would visit referred patients at the acute care hospital. Evaluations were based off of the NALTH criteria plus their own clinical guidelines developed with clinical staff.

5. Case Study: Issues 5 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential Assessments were taking anywhere between 1 and 2 hours. Nurse evaluators were entering patient information into Microsoft Word documents, then emailing the forms and faxing supporting documents back for clinical and financial review. This pushed average time to reach an admission decision up to 6 hours. Anecdotally, Nurse Evaluators were saying that competitors were “beating them to the punch” and admitting patients before they could get approval for complicated patients. Because referral data was collected in Word documents, reporting was a nightmare. On average a full day each month was spent consolidating data and running reports.

6. Case Study: Actions 6 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential The client decided to implement the Vindicet Patient Matching System because it let them build off of what was working – defined roles and approval process, rigorous criteria – while also speeding the process and providing better access to data. The Vindicet team held a series of process interviews by email and phone, which lead up to a daylong onsite stakeholder review session conducted with a live “demo” instance of the software. Follow up training session consisted of two 1-hour training sessions conducted through GoTo Meeting with additional one-on-one support available by email or phone during the 2 week pilot. Following that, the system went live.

7. Case Study: Results after 3 Months 7 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential After 3 months of use we evaluated progress by using data collected by the application: • We reduced the time between receipt of referral notification and the actual logging of the referral opportunity. • We reduced the time required to distribute referral documentation for review by both clinical and non-clinical departments within the hospital. • We reduced the time lag needed for insurer verification of coverage. • We reduced the time needed to make the accept/deny decision and to notify the referral source of that decision. All told, process improvement time gains averaged approximately 90 minutes per referral.

8. Case Study: Financial Impact 8 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential During the 3-month period of use, 60 patients were accepted (121 patients were denied), with quarterly revenues generated by those accepted patients of $1.62M. Based on potential opportunity revenues of $27,000 per patient ($1.62M / 60 patients) we can use the system to categorize opportunity losses. For example, there were 11 patients that went to another LTAC, leaving a $297,000 opportunity loss. There was one denied because of staffing levels ($27,000). There were a total of 34 patients whose insurance denied LTAC services or who had no payer source identified ($918,000). Early intervention on at least some of these cases might have brought in additional, currently unrealized revenues. Management is starting to allocate resources and to evaluate process changes to see how it can increase the referral conversion rate and, consequently, improve the revenue stream.

9. Supporting Data: Top Referral Sources 9 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential

10. Supporting Data: Win/Loss for Top Referral Sources 10 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential

11. Supporting Data: Win/Loss by Program 11 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential

12. Supporting Data: Patients Denied by Reason 12 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential

13. 13 © 2011 Vindicet LLC | Confidential Thank You For more information please visit www.vindicet.com