CMS-0057-F · Readiness, API engineering & delivery
CMS-0057-F Implementation Services
CMS-0057-F implementation for US payers and the healthtech teams serving them. We assess your gaps, build the FHIR APIs and connect the systems behind them, from a first workstream to a stalled-build recovery. New to the rule? Start with CMS-0057-F requirements explained.
Trusted by leading healthcare technology companies and global enterprises to deliver AI-powered solutions that transform patient care.
AI-powered personalized guide for menopause support
Patient engagement and communication platform
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Digital Health Platform for medical professionals
Patient engagement and communication platform
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Digital Health Platform for medical professionals
Escrow Management Platform for Developers and Banks
Corporate Wellness and Health Management Platform
Leading Medical Research and Healthcare Institution
Cancer care, research and education institution
Mobile commerce and affiliate technology platform
AI-powered personalized guide for menopause support
Patient engagement and communication platform
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Digital Health Platform for medical professionals
Patient engagement and communication platform
Clinic Management Platform for patients and Doctors
Digital Health Platform for medical professionals
Escrow Management Platform for Developers and Banks
Corporate Wellness and Health Management Platform
Leading Medical Research and Healthcare Institution
Cancer care, research and education institution
Mobile commerce and affiliate technology platform
Nirmitee open source / Da Vinci
Don’T Just Take Our Word for It. Inspect Our Code.
Three public, payer-side reference implementations for the prior-authorization journey. Built by Nirmitee in Go and .NET, for engineering teams to read, run, test against and build on.
Four standardised FHIR APIs, plus operational changes to how prior authorization decisions get made and reported. The rule applies to Medicare Advantage organizations, state Medicaid and CHIP fee-for-service programs, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans, and QHP issuers on the federally facilitated exchanges.
Prior Authorization API
A FHIR interface where a provider can discover what documentation you require, submit the request, and receive the response electronically. Da Vinci CRD, DTR and PAS are recommended implementation guides under the 2024 rule, not a substitute for reviewing its required standards.
Patient Access API
Expanded to carry prior authorization status alongside claims, encounters and USCDI clinical data, refreshed no later than one business day after the information changes.
Provider Access API
Bulk FHIR access so in-network providers can pull claims, encounter, clinical and prior authorization data for their attributed patients. Requires attribution logic and a working patient opt-out.
Payer-to-Payer API
When a member changes plans, up to five years of claims, clinical and prior authorization history moves across. Requires patient opt-in and member matching against the previous payer.
2026: operational provisions begin
Decision timeframes, denial reasons and API usage reporting have payer-specific applicability. The 72-hour / seven-calendar-day timeframes exclude FFE QHP issuers under this final rule.
API requirements generally begin January 1, 2027, with payer-specific dates and rating- or plan-year provisions. Confirm the applicable date for your organization.
Calendar year 2027
MIPS clinicians and hospitals begin attesting to the Electronic Prior Authorization measure.
The Payer Has the Obligation. You May Still Have the Work.
CMS-0057-F names health plans. But an API only works if the systems on both ends of it do. Three very different builds come out of the same rule.
Health Plans and Payers
You carry the obligation. The build is four conformant FHIR APIs sitting on top of claims, UM, eligibility, clinical and provider data that currently live in five different systems.
Scope: source-to-FHIR mapping, Da Vinci profile conformance, consent and opt-out flows, member matching, Inferno and Touchstone testing, and the metrics you're required to report.
Your users will consume supported payer APIs as they become available. Prior authorization status, payer-held clinical history and five years of prior-plan data become reachable through a standard interface, if your product can consume it.
Scope: multi-payer FHIR client architecture, CRD and DTR handled inside your existing workflow, per-payer variation, and the authorization layer.
A FHIR layer can sit alongside your existing systems where their interfaces and data support the scope. Assess missing data, update frequency and upstream dependencies before deciding whether source changes are needed.
Nothing in band one gets replaced. If a system can be read from, it can be mapped.
Scope
CMS-0057-F API Implementation Workstreams
Select the workstreams your environment needs. We agree the deliverables, dependencies and acceptance criteria before implementation begins.
Da Vinci CRD, DTR and PAS
Coverage Requirements Discovery over CDS Hooks, Documentation Templates and Rules with CQL-driven questionnaires, and Prior Authorization Support wrapping the X12 278/275 you already exchange.
Patient Access API
CARIN Blue Button for claims and encounters, US Core for clinical, PDex for prior authorization status. The one-business-day refresh enforced in the pipeline, not in a runbook.
Provider Access API
Bulk FHIR export with attribution logic, group management, and patient opt-out honoured at query time rather than reconciled afterwards.
Payer-to-Payer Exchange
$member-match implementation, opt-in capture, and a five-year historical pull that reconciles duplicate records instead of stacking them.
Source System Mapping
X12 278/275, HL7 v2, C-CDA, flat files and proprietary claims schemas mapped bidirectionally to FHIR R4. We maintain the Mirth Connect Cookbook in the open; this is the day job.
Identity, Auth and Consent
SMART on FHIR, OAuth 2.0, OIDC, mTLS and UDAP-aligned dynamic client registration. Consent capture, revocation and audit at the resource level.
Conformance Testing
Inferno and Touchstone wired into CI, so profile validation runs on every merge instead of the week before attestation.
Reporting and Audit Evidence
Immutable audit logs carrying decision timestamps and consent events, plus the Patient Access usage metrics and public prior authorization metrics as queryable outputs.
Deployment
AWS, Azure, GCP, on-prem or hybrid. Containerised, infrastructure-as-code, handed over with runbooks. Your accounts, your repository.
Engagement
CMS-0057-F Consulting and Implementation Engagements
Assessment · scope agreed first
Readiness Assessment and Roadmap
You get a gap analysis across all four API domains, a source-to-FHIR mapping inventory, a risk register, a sequenced plan with effort estimates, and a build-versus-buy recommendation. If buying is the right call for you, the assessment says so.
Scope a delivery team across FHIR architecture, integration engineering and QA. Agree milestones, demonstration cadence, repository access and handover deliverables in the statement of work.
We audit what exists, keep what conforms, replace what doesn't, and get you to a testable endpoint. Most rescues start with a conformance run to establish what's actually true.
Your estimate depends on the systems behind the APIs and the work your team has already completed. A readiness assessment turns those dependencies into a scope you can compare across vendors.
API Scope and Source Data
Which Patient Access, Provider Access, Payer-to-Payer and Prior Authorization workstreams need engineering? Claims, clinical, eligibility and utilization-management sources each add mapping, access and data-quality work. Existing interfaces and reusable mappings affect the estimate.
Platform and Operating Model
Compare the engineering scope with FHIR platform licensing, cloud infrastructure, identity services and ongoing operations. Confirm who owns configuration, member matching, consent, monitoring and incident response before comparing proposals.
Testing and Acceptance
Agree the API versions, test scenarios, environments and evidence needed for acceptance. Include source-system failures, access controls, data reconciliation and handover. Separate third-party security assessments and partner onboarding from the implementation estimate.
What to Request in Your Proposal
Ask for named deliverables, responsibility boundaries, dependencies, exclusions, milestone acceptance criteria and an estimate by workstream. Separate discovery, implementation, third-party charges and support so you can compare the total delivery and operating cost.
Review relevant code and test evidence, the engineers who would do the work, and how they handle your source systems. Our CRD, DTR and PAS servers and their Inferno results are public, so you can read the work before the first call.
Sequence the work around source-data readiness, security review and acceptance criteria. The assessment sets the estimate, the sequence and the acceptance criteria for each API.
Phase 1
Discovery and Mapping
Inventory the source systems, map claims, UM, clinical and eligibility data to FHIR resources, identify the gaps that need new data capture, and agree the deployment model.
Phase 2
Build and Integrate
Stand up the FHIR core, build the connectors, configure Da Vinci profiles, implement member matching, and wire consent and opt-out flows.
Phase 3
Conformance and Security Testing
Inferno and Touchstone runs against every profile, end-to-end API testing, load testing, penetration testing and security review.
Phase 4
Go-live and Evidence
Production deployment, monitoring and alerting, audit log verification, and the documentation your compliance team needs on file.
Ongoing
IG Version Tracking
Review changes to implementation guides against the applicable regulatory version and your deployed system. Agree testing and update scope before adopting a new version.
After 2027
The Layer You Build for CMS Is the Layer You Build on Next
Compliance builds have a habit of becoming write-only: data goes in to satisfy an auditor and never comes back out. Built properly, this one is a queryable clinical and claims store that everything else can sit on.
Member and Provider Apps
Member portals, provider-facing tools and third-party integrations run off the same FHIR store and the same auth layer. No second integration project.
Risk Adjustment and Quality
Conditions, encounters and medications already structured to US Core. Flatten to tables for HCC models and HEDIS measures against the compliance store directly.
Care Management
Longitudinal records, including the history that arrives through Payer-to-Payer, feed care coordination, utilization management and population health without a new pipeline.
AI and Automation
Structured FHIR is what ML pipelines want. Prior authorization auto-decisioning, predictive models, NLP over clinical notes, all against a single source.
Provider Collaboration
The attribution and export machinery built for Provider Access is the same machinery value-based care reporting and network analytics need.
A Foundation You Can Extend
Reusable mappings, documented interfaces and automated tests give future work a starting point. New standards and exchange requirements still need their own scope, validation and implementation.
Track record
What We&Apos;Ve Already Shipped
FHIR R4 architecture, Da Vinci profile work, X12 and HL7 mapping: the layers CMS-0057-F sits on. Much of it is in public repositories, so you can read the code before you talk to us.
Da Vinci CRD Server
Coverage Requirements Discovery over CDS Hooks, in Go and .NET. Passes every test in the Inferno CRD Server suites: 136 passed, 0 failed (v2.2.1) and 86 passed, 0 failed (v2.0.1).
Prior Authorization Support with Claim submission, inquiry and pended-request notifications. Passes every test in the Inferno PAS Server suites: 84 of 84 (v2.2.1) and 68 of 68 (v2.0.1).
Questionnaire packages, CQL libraries and adaptive questionnaires. Passes the Inferno DTR Payer Server suites apart from two Inferno test-kit issues (one open, one fixed upstream and awaiting deployment): 43 passed, 2 failed (v2.2.0) and 17 passed, 2 failed (v2.0.1).
We cover security controls, data handling, contractual requirements and assurance evidence in scoping, alongside API conformance.
FAQ
CMS-0057-F Questions We Get Asked
Not directly. The obligation sits with Medicare Advantage organizations, state Medicaid and CHIP fee-for-service programs, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans, and QHP issuers on the federally facilitated exchanges. Provider products also need to plan how they consume supported payer APIs. Availability and compliance dates vary by payer, and provider reporting requirements should be assessed separately.
Our Da Vinci CRD, DTR and PAS servers are public, with their Inferno results linked above, alongside our FHIR R4 server and Mirth Connect work. In scoping we walk through the engineering that matches your APIs, source systems and payer programs.
We first assess whether your existing systems can provide the required data and update frequency through permitted interfaces. A separate integration layer may be suitable, but missing source data or access constraints can require upstream changes.
Not automatically. CMS describes enforcement discretion for qualifying all-FHIR prior-authorization implementations, as well as FHIR/X12 combinations. Review the applicable transaction rules and counterparties before choosing the architecture.
We estimate after reviewing source data, API scope, identity and consent, security review, testing and organizational approvals. These dependencies drive both integration and conformance work, and the estimate names each one.
Operational requirements generally begin in 2026, including denial reasons and reporting. Applicability and dates vary by payer. The 2024 final rule excludes drugs, and its 72-hour and seven-calendar-day decision timeframes exclude FFE QHP issuers. Review the linked CMS guidance with your regulatory team.
Depends on how much of the data is already structured and whether you want to own the layer afterwards. Compare a platform’s supported scope, implementation dependencies, licensing and long-term operating model with a custom build. Our readiness assessment gives you a recommendation either way, including “buy it”. We'd rather tell you that in week two than in month five.
Ownership, repository access, deployment accounts and handover are agreed in the engagement contract. Third-party platforms and components carry their own licensing terms, which we list in the handover.
We quote after reviewing the API workstreams, source systems, data quality, identity and consent requirements, existing platform licenses, and testing scope. Ask for separate estimates for discovery, implementation, third-party costs and ongoing support. A project proposal should state assumptions, exclusions, dependencies and acceptance criteria; there is no single published price for every payer environment.
We can scope a specific integration or testing workstream alongside your existing team. Start by sharing the platform, supported API versions, available interfaces and responsibility boundaries. We confirm platform access, licensing and permitted customization in the first week and plan around them.
Bring a high-level source-system inventory, the APIs you need to deliver, your current build status and known access or timeline constraints. We use that context to identify the next assessment or engineering workstream. Do not send patient records, credentials or confidential documents through the website form.
Next step
You Don’T Need Every Answer to Start the Conversation.
Tell us what needs to work, what exists today and where you are blocked. We’ll discuss the relevant API workstreams and whether an assessment, implementation pod or build review fits.
Discuss your systems and implementation priorities
Identify what needs investigation before an estimate
Agree scope and commercial terms before project work
HL7® and FHIR® are registered trademarks of Health Level Seven International. CMS-0057-F is a regulation of the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
From our YouTube channel
Related videos
Explore the workflows and decisions behind this service. Demonstrations and recorded discussions have the scope described in each video.
Explore the prior authorization rule and API workflows. Confirm current requirements with official sources.
We value your privacy
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience, serve personalized content, and analyze our traffic. By clicking "Accept All", you consent to our use of cookies. Read our Privacy Policy