Provider credentialing & network · Credentialing & enrollment
Medallion
Medallion is a provider credentialing and payer enrollment platform for digital health companies and provider organizations. It shortens time-to-billable-provider with AI-assisted workflows and specialist review. It is not an ambulatory EHR for charting visits.
Strong fit
- Digital health companies and mid-sized providers that need faster credentialing and payer enrollment
- Groups that track how many days until a new provider can bill, and the enrollment backlog
- Teams that want AI help with credentialing, with human specialists checking the work
Weak fit
- Buyers who only need an outpatient EHR for charting
- Tiny practices with a handful of providers and no enrollment pain
- Groups unwilling to change who owns credentialing procedures
Bottom line
Medallion is worth using for digital health companies and provider groups whose growth is held back by slow credentialing and payer enrollment. It suits teams ready to change how credentialing work runs. Health plans that need NCQA verification services may prefer Andros.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Medallion automates provider credentialing, payer enrollment, licensing, and related network operations so digital health companies and provider groups can get clinicians billing sooner.
Results look strongest when providers can bill sooner and audits get easier. Projects stall when the platform turns into a place to store documents.
Setup changes how credentialing teams work. Pricing ranges from mid-sized to large-enterprise software.
Among provider credentialing tools we review, Medallion scores highest for enrollment speed at digital health companies and provider groups. Andros suits health plans buying NCQA verification services, and Verifiable suits buyers mainly interested in automated packet processing.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| MD-Staff | 7.8 | 7.5 |
| Medallion | 7.7 | 7.3 |
| CertifyOS | 7.7 | 7.4 |
| Andros | 7.6 | 7.3 |
| Assured | 7.4 | 7.2 |
| Credentially | 7.2 | 7.0 |
| Verifiable | 7.1 | 6.9 |
| Welter Healthcare Partners | 7.0 | 7.2 |
| Incredable | 6.8 | 6.6 |
| Modio Health | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| ProviderTrust | 6.8 | 6.6 |
| Medversant | 6.7 | 6.4 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Software and service packages for credentialing, enrollment, and provider network operations. |
| What usually drives cost | Number of providers, states and payers covered, delegated credentialing needs, and credentials verification service levels. |
| What to ask before you buy | Cost to onboard each provider at your monthly volume, turnaround guarantees, and what is software versus services. |
| Published pricing | Medallion does not publish prices. Expect a quote based on volume. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Medallion to function | |
| Your provider list and access to primary source data | Automated credentialing needs clean inputs. |
| Owners for credentialing and enrollment | Software cannot own your procedures by itself. |
| A list of payers and the markets that matter most | Enrolling everywhere at once wastes paid seats. |
| Agreed turnaround times you will hold the vendor to | You cannot manage a vague promise of faster enrollment. |
| Compliance needs spelled out at the start | Otherwise surprises show up at audit time. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Track each week how many days until new providers can bill | Recruiting and finance both care about that number. |
| Drop old trackers after switching over | Two systems bring the backlog back. |
| Send provider list changes as they happen | Out-of-date lists cause enrollment errors. |
| Check stuck files every day during rollout | Stuck files need a person quickly. |
| Match hiring plans to credentialing capacity | Hiring surges without planning cause delays. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You only need an EHR for visit charting. | |
| You have very few providers and no enrollment problems. | |
| No credentialing owner will change procedures. | |
| You will not provide primary source or CAQH data. | |
| Leaders expect same-day enrollment with every payer, with no exceptions. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | From signing to kickoff | 2-5 weeks to import providers and rank payers |
| 2 | From kickoff to first use | 4-10 weeks for the first groups of enrollments |
| 3 | From first use to steady results | 2-4 months until days-to-bill numbers level off |
Leadership
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.