A hospital's largest asset is usually a receivable from the National Health Insurance Scheme, and its largest risk is that a portion of that receivable will be rejected for reasons decided at the point of care months earlier.
Claims are won or lost at the bedside
A claim is rejected because documentation was incomplete, coding was wrong, or authorisation was not obtained, and all three happen in the clinical area rather than in finance. By the time finance sees the rejection the episode is months old and the supporting record is difficult to reconstruct. The control that matters is at capture, not at submission.
Ageing tells you what the provision should be
Claims receivable should be aged by submission date and analysed by rejection reason, so that the provision is derived from your own experience rather than from a percentage somebody chose. Where a hospital cannot say which claim types get rejected and why, the provision is a guess and the auditor will treat it as one.
The tax question nobody asks
Healthcare providers typically make a mix of exempt and taxable supplies, and where that mix exists input tax has to be apportioned. Pharmacy sales, private patient work, diagnostics for external referrals and non-clinical services all sit differently. We rarely find this apportionment done properly, and the direction of the error is usually in the Ghana Revenue Authority's favour.
Consultants
Visiting consultants engaged on a fee basis raise a genuine employment status question, and the answer determines whether PAYE should have been operated. Where a consultant works substantially exclusively at one facility on set sessions, the arrangement is worth examining before somebody else examines it.
Where claims are won or lost, not at submission
How the provision should actually be derived
Input tax, where exempt and taxable supplies mix
Findings
What we find in healthcare providers
Concentrated in the claims cycle and in two tax questions that are rarely asked until an officer asks them.
- Claims receivable aged by submission date only, with no analysis by rejection reason
- Provision set as a flat percentage rather than derived from actual rejection experience
- Rejected claims not resubmitted within the permitted window
- Input tax not apportioned between exempt and taxable supplies
- Consultant engagement status unexamined where the arrangement looks like employment
- Pharmacy stock counted infrequently, with expiry losses absorbed rather than analysed
- Clinical procurement outside normal approval limits because it is clinical
- Equipment leases and service contracts not assessed under IFRS 16
Services
What healthcare clients use us for
The audit leads, and the claims process review is usually the first advisory engagement that follows.
Statutory audit
Claims receivable, provisioning, pharmacy stock and lease accounting.
Explore →Internal controls review
The claims cycle from capture to collection, and clinical procurement authority.
Explore →VAT and indirect taxes
Exempt and taxable supply mix, and input tax apportionment.
Explore →Payroll and employment taxes
Consultant engagement status and the PAYE consequence.
Explore →Questions
Questions from healthcare providers
How should NHIS claims receivable be provided against?
Why do our claims get rejected?
Do we need to apportion input tax?
Are our consultants employees for tax purposes?
Next step
Send us your claims ageing and your rejection analysis.
If the second does not exist, that is the finding, and producing it is usually the highest-return piece of work available to a hospital.
