The Credentialing Resource Center’s (CRC) annual MSP Salary Survey measures the compensation rates, essential duties, and other workplace trends shaping the careers of MSPs across the industry. The 2022 edition features new and improved questions and response options, developed with input from MSPs working in credentialing environments ranging from acute care hospitals and ambulatory centers to CVOs and health plans.

Click here to take the 2022 MSP Salary Survey today to make sure your professional experiences are represented. The more responses we have, the more meaningful (and actionable) the data will be in the special reports we release for both CRC members and non-members.

Beyond receiving copies of the reports, to show our thanks for taking the survey, we will select one person at random to receive a $25 Amazon gift card.

Convinced? Click the following link to take the 2022 MSP Salary Survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2022MSP.

Send any survey-related questions to CRC’s Managing Editor, Karen Kondilis, at kkondilis@hcpro.com.

Due to changing healthcare technologies, increasing specialization, and the growth of individual healthcare institutions, organizations must routinely evaluate new procedures to establish criteria for privileging practitioners in that area. It is often difficult to determine whether a privilege belongs in the basic core or whether the criteria for a particular privilege should include additional education, training, or recent experience.

According to a recent survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 56% of adults in the U.S. think healthcare in general is handled “not too/not at all well.” In comparison, 32% thought healthcare was “somewhat well” and just 12% thought it was “extremely/very well.”

Credentialing teams face the prospect of more and more problematic physicians applying for jobs. How can these teams do their part to ensure an acceptable level of care that ultimately protects patients?

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the “Court”) recently ruled that a cardiothoracic surgeon failed to provide sufficient evidence that he was racially discriminated against as an American-born Caucasian. His two other claims of retaliation and tortious interference of contract also failed for lack of evidence.