WorkflowPatient Services

Patient Assistance Program Eligibility

Patient assistance program eligibility, every rule checked and cited to the page that proved it

Every application checked against every rule, most decided within a day.

See one case, screen by screen ↓
demo13ruleschecked on every application, each finding cited to its document and page
demo0decisionsthat differ for the same facts, across 1,186 compared in the nightly consistency check
target0.6daysmedian business days to a decision, against the 4.5-day industry standard
target45daysof notice before an enrolment ends, the renewal pre-filled from last year
In short

What is Patient Assistance Program Eligibility?

Software that takes a free-medicine application from the packet that arrives by fax, portal or mail to a signed decision: residency, prescription, coverage path, household, income against the poverty guideline and signatures checked against the programme's rules. Patient Assistance Program Eligibility adds six agents that read the packet, walk it down the rules and cite each finding to its page, for a reviewer to decide and sign.

How to choose AI solutions for life sciences →

Updated

The problem

Why a free-medicine application takes days to decide

A patient assistance programme gives medicine free to uninsured and under-insured patients below an income limit. Every application arrives as a packet — the form signed by the patient and prescriber, the prescription, pay stubs or a tax return, benefit and pension letters, and the insurer's appeal decision or Medicare Part D plan letter — by fax, portal or mail. A reviewer keys the figures, annualises each pay stub by hand, looks up the poverty guideline for the household size and compares, packet by packet.

The hard cases sit between documents. The application lists four people and the tax return three, because a baby was born after the tax year. A prior-authorisation denial arrives where an appeal decision is needed, or a Medicaid card is in the packet. Two reviewers can decide the same facts differently, and when an auditor or the patient asks why, the reasoning sits in a reviewer's notes, not against the page that proved it. Rules applied unevenly are a compliance risk under HHS-OIG guidance on assistance programmes.

typical4.5daysindustry standard for a new free-goods decision
demo71%of packets complete on first pass in the sample programme — nothing missing on arrival
demo96requestsfor out-of-date income proof in the last 30 days on the sample programme — the most common reason a packet comes back
Where an application's business days goestimated
By hand4.5 days
With the solution0.6 days
  • Logging the fax and sorting the packet's pages0.5 → 0.1 d
  • Keying income and annualising pay stubs1 → 0.1 d
  • Checking the coverage path and its proof0.8 → 0.1 d
  • Household, signatures and proof dates0.8 → 0.1 d
  • Applying the rules and deciding1 → 0.2 d
  • Letter, pharmacy referral and re-enrolment diary0.5 → 0.1 d

Estimated split for a typical new free-goods application, by hand and with the solution.

How it works

How an application finds its path

Agents read the packet and walk the programme's rules, each branch cited to its page; a reviewer signs, then the letter goes out.

What comes in
Packets inFax, portal or mail · application and every proof
Agents at work
Packet Readerevery page labelled
Then
Income Calculator
Coverage Checker
Signature & Identity Checker
Then
Rule Checkerevery branch cited
Then
Letter Writerapproved templates
A person decides
Reviewerdecides and signs; denials get a second signer
What comes out
Signed letter to the patient
Referral to the free-goods pharmacy
Re-enrolment reminder set
One case, step by step

One morning's applications, from fax to signed letter

Northwind Cares runs a patient assistance programme for three medicines — Veltrimab, Corventa and Talmirex. Sam Patel, an eligibility reviewer, starts the day with 20 open applications. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.

  1. 01Morning

    Today's applications, sorted by what they need

    Sam Patel · Eligibility reviewer

    The rail on the left holds 20 open applications and 4 decided: 3 need Sam, 7 are clear to approve, 4 are recommended for denial and 5 wait on documents. Maria Santos's fax has just arrived at 08:42. Ana Ruiz's Veltrimab application is open on the decision path — the programme's rules drawn as a tree, with her route lit and each gate citing its page.

    “Every lit branch cites the page that proved it · click a gate or a document to see the proof.”

  2. 0208:42 · one click

    “Read the packet” — the gates light one by one

    The agents

    Maria Santos's packet is 8 pages and 4 documents, faxed by Dr. Tomás Rivera's office for Talmirex. The Packet Reader labels every page, the Signature & Identity Checker confirms a Houston address and the Coverage Checker works out the coverage path, while the tree lights gate by gate as each agent works.

    Each step is shown as it runs: “Coverage Checker · finding the coverage path.”

  3. 03Seconds later

    $1,472 a week — 280% of the guideline

    Income Calculator · Rule Checker

    Her pay stub from Ship Channel Terminals, dated Oct 2, shows $1,472.00 weekly. Annualised at × 52 that is $76,544, against $27,320 for a household of 3 — 280% of the poverty guideline, under the 400% limit. All 13 rules are met and the branch to eligible lights, with the pay stub open on the right at page 6.

    “Eligible — recommend approve · all 13 rules met · 280% of the guideline.”

  4. 04Needs you

    Ana Ruiz: the application says 4, the tax return says 3

    Sam Patel · Eligibility reviewer

    Ana's insurer, Crestline Health, upheld its denial on appeal; her doctor's office faxed 11 pages. Her income is $3,780 bi-weekly × 26 = $98,280 plus Marco's Schedule C net profit of $20,120 — $118,400. Her application lists 4 people; the 2025 tax return shows 3, because Leo was born in March 2026. With 4 she is at 359% of the guideline; with 3, 433% — over the limit.

    “Needs you — the household size decides the outcome.”

  5. 05One decision

    He counts 4, and the path turns to eligible

    Sam Patel · Eligibility reviewer

    Programme rule 4.2 counts the people living in the home today, as attested and signed on the application; the tax return proves income, not the household. Sam counts 4. The household gate records “4 people · counted by Sam Patel”, the income gate passes at 359% and the outcome turns to eligible.

    Rule 4.2: “Where the two differ, the reviewer records which count was used and why.”

  6. 06Approve

    What he signs, and the letter that goes with it

    Sam Patel · Eligibility reviewer

    The approval shows Veltrimab free for 12 months, Oct 7, 2026 to Oct 6, 2027, shipped from Clearwater Free Goods Pharmacy with the referral sent on signing. The basis is 4 people, 359% of the guideline, 13 of 13 rules met — no second signer needed. The approval letter is drafted from the approved template, with every figure taken from the decision.

  7. 07Signed · 09:13

    Approved and enrolled, with a record for audit

    Sam Patel · Eligibility reviewer

    Ana's application is approved and enrolled the morning after her fax arrived — 0.9 business days on the clock, against the 4.5-day standard. The decision record lists six findings, from residency to signatures, each with the document and page that proved it, the agents that checked it and the rules version, 2026.4. One click exports it for audit.

    “Approved and enrolled · Sam Patel · Oct 7 · 09:13.”

  8. 08Recommend deny

    Over the limit — and a second signer

    Omar Haddad · Senior reviewer

    Bradley Hughes applied for Corventa after Front Range Mutual upheld its denial. His 2025 return shows $167,200 for a household of 3 — 612% of the guideline, over the 400% limit. The path leaves the spine at the income gate, red. The recommendation is a denial, and Omar Haddad second-signs every denial before the letter is sent.

    Every denial letter lists independent charitable foundations and explains how to ask for a review within 30 days.

  9. 09Medicare Part D

    A Part D patient takes his own path

    Coverage Checker

    Walter Brooks, 71, is on Medicare Part D. His Social Security letter and pension statement add to $31,800 — 147% of the guideline for 2. He has spent 6.2% of his income on prescriptions this year, above the programme's 3%. Free medicine is given outside the Part D benefit and the plan is told. Every Part D approval needs a second signer, so Omar Haddad signs after Sam.

    “Eligible — two people sign · Medicare Part D: Omar Haddad signs after you.”

  10. 10Every night at 06:00

    Re-enrolment, 45 days before therapy would stop

    Letter Writer

    Enrolments last 12 months. Each night the solution finds enrolments ending in 45 days, pre-fills the renewal from last year and drafts the reminders. This morning 17 enrolments end in the next 60 days, 6 reminders are ready to send and 2 patients are at risk of a gap, with a call task for each.

    “Reminders go out 45 days ahead, pre-filled from last year, so therapy never stops.”

Who it’s for

Built for everyone who decides a free-medicine application.

The same applications, seen by the four people who carry the programme — what their day looked like, and what it looks like now.

SP
Sam PatelEligibility reviewer · Northwind Cares programme
Eligibility reviewer
Before
“I spend my day re-adding pay stubs, not deciding.” Keys every figure, annualises by hand and looks up the guideline, packet by packet.
Now
Opens each application with its path already lit and every gate cited; spends his time on the one question a person must answer, then signs.
OH
Omar HaddadSenior reviewer · second signer for denials and Medicare Part D
Senior reviewer
Before
“Show me the page that proved it.” Second-signs every denial and every Part D approval, and needs the reasoning on one screen.
Now
Sees where the path left the spine, the figure that decided it and the page it came from, then adds the second signature.
PR
Priya RamanPAP operations lead · turnaround, staffing and rules settings
PAP operations lead
Before
“Four and a half days is the standard. We should beat it by days.” Owns turnaround, staffing and the rules settings.
Now
Sees volume, days to decision against the 4.5-day standard, outcomes by coverage path and the reasons packets come back, on one dashboard.
DO
Dana OkaforPatient services compliance · approves rule versions
Patient services compliance
Before
“Same facts, same answer — prove it.” Answers auditors from reviewers' notes.
Now
Approves each rules version, and reads a nightly check that compares every decision with the same facts.
Built on the engine

6 agents. Each with one job, and hard limits.

Agents read the packet and walk the programme's rules, each branch cited to its page; a reviewer signs, then the letter goes out.

Packet Reader

Splits each faxed, uploaded or mailed packet into pages and labels every document and the person it belongs to — application, pay stub, tax return, benefit letter, insurance letter, Medicare letter, prescription — keeping page numbers so every later figure can cite its page.

  • Never guesses a document type below 0.85 confidence — sends it to a person
  • Masks tax IDs and account numbers on read
Income Calculator

Extracts every income figure, annualises pay stubs and benefit letters — weekly × 52, bi-weekly × 26, semi-monthly × 24, monthly × 12 — adds every household source and works out the share of the poverty guideline, with the arithmetic shown.

  • Never rounds before the comparison
  • Uses the most recent proof for each person
  • Arithmetic is recomputed, not estimated
Coverage Checker

Decides the coverage path — uninsured, denied after appeal or Medicare Part D — and checks the letter that proves it; for Part D, the plan letter and the pharmacy out-of-pocket statement against the programme's share of income.

  • A prior-authorisation denial is not enough — it asks for the appeal decision
  • Medicaid coverage means the programme does not apply
  • Medicare Part D always routes to a second signer
Signature & Identity Checker

Confirms the patient and prescriber signed and dated, the privacy authorisation is signed, the prescriber NPI is valid and the address is in the U.S.

  • A missing signature always becomes a request, never a denial
Rule Checker

Applies the 13 programme rules to every application the same way, exactly as written in the current version, and proposes approve, request more or deny — each finding with its citation.

  • Never considers the prescriber, the office or prescription volume
  • Same facts, same recommendation
  • Recommends only; a person signs
Letter Writer

Writes approval, denial, missing-document and re-enrolment letters from approved templates in plain language, and refers approved patients to the free-goods pharmacy.

  • Only approved templates, at a grade 6–8 reading level
  • No income line items in letters
Reviewer

Decides and signs every application. The agents propose; a named person decides.

Ask in plain words

Ask about any application, rule or letter

Ask about any application, rule or letter — or say what to change. Every answer points to its source.

Why does Ana Ruiz's application need me?

PAP-10418 meets 11 of 13 rules. The two open ones — household size and the income limit — turn on one question: the application lists 4 people, the 2025 tax return shows 3, because her son Leo was born in March 2026. With 4 people she is at 359% of the guideline; with 3, 433%. The household rule counts people living in the home today, so the recommendation is to count 4 — that makes her eligible.

How do you handle Medicare Part D patients?

They follow their own path: free medicine is given outside the Part D benefit, the plan is told so it never counts toward out-of-pocket costs, and they must have spent at least 3% of household income on prescriptions this year. A second person always signs. Walter Brooks spent $1,960 on an income of $31,800 — 6.2%, so he qualifies; George Lambert spent $480 (1.7%), so the recommendation is a denial with a note on when to re-apply.

How do you annualise pay stubs?

The same way every time: weekly × 52, bi-weekly × 26, semi-monthly × 24, monthly × 12. The most recent proof wins, and it must be dated within 90 days. Ana Ruiz's $3,780 bi-weekly is $98,280 a year; Maria Santos's $1,472 weekly is $76,544. Out-of-date proof is requested again — it is never a reason to deny.

Can we prove decisions are consistent?

Yes. Every night the consistency check compares decisions with the same facts: in the last 30 days, 1,186 decisions in 5 fact patterns, 0 that differ. Nine reviewer overrides each carry a written reason. The prescriber, office and prescription volume are never inputs.

Every screen

The working solution, as it ships.

13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.

The decision pathToday's applications by outcome, the programme's rules drawn as a tree with the application's route lit, and the proof page on the right.
A packet being readA fax that has just arrived: the gates light one by one as each agent works, with the step it is on shown above the tree.
Eligible, with the figure that proved itAll 13 rules met at 280% of the guideline, the income gate citing the pay stub, and the pay stub open at the deciding figure.
The full reviewThe packet's labelled documents, how the agents checked it, the household conflict side by side, the income arithmetic and the source page.
A person resolves the conflictThe reviewer counts the household; the gate records who counted it, and the path and outcome update.
Approve and signMedicine, enrolment dates, the free-goods pharmacy, the basis of the decision, whether a second signer is needed and the approval letter.
The decision recordEvery finding with the document and page that proved it, the agents that checked it and the rules version, ready to export for audit.
Over the limitA path that leaves the spine at the income gate, recommended for denial, with the senior reviewer to second-sign.
The Medicare Part D pathOut-of-pocket spend against the programme's share of income, benefit and pension income cited, and two people to sign.
ApplicationsEvery application with its coverage path, household and income, share of the guideline against the limit, rules met and days on the clock.
Re-enrolmentEnrolments ending in the next 60 days, reminders drafted overnight and pre-filled from last year, and the patients at risk of a gap.
The dashboardVolume, days to decision against the 4.5-day standard, outcomes by coverage path, why packets come back and turnaround by medicine.
Programme rulesIncome limit, Part D spend, proof window, enrolment length, the guideline table and the second-signer rules — versioned and audited.
Governance

Built for programme compliance: cited, consistent, signed.

Every gate cites its pageEach gate on the decision path names the document and page that decided it — “Pay stub Sep 25 · p. 6”, “Appeal decision · p. 10” — and the decision record lists every finding with its source, ready to export for audit.
Recommend, never decideThe agents propose; a named reviewer signs every approval and denial. This setting is always on and cannot be switched off.
Two signatures where it mattersEvery denial and every Medicare Part D approval needs a second signer before the letter is sent. Approving against the recommendation needs a written reason and the second signer.
Same facts, same answerThe 13 rules are applied the same way to every applicant. The prescriber, the office and prescription volume are never inputs, and a nightly check compares every decision with the same facts.
Income data kept to what is neededTax IDs and account numbers are masked on read, letters never carry income line items, and line-level income figures are removed 30 days after the letter is sent — only the totals and the decision stay.
Versioned rules, on the recordRule changes need compliance approval and are versioned — 2026.4, effective Oct 1, approved by Dana Okafor. Every agent step, signature and letter is on the activity trail with who and when.
Configuration

Your programme's rules, applied the same way every time

Programme rules apply to every application the same way. Changes are versioned and audited.

SettingDefaultChoose from
Household income limit400% of the HHS poverty guideline300% · 400% · 500% · 600%
Medicare Part D out-of-pocket spend3% of household income2% · 3% · 5%
Income proof must be dated within90 days60 days · 90 days · 120 days
Enrolment length12 months6 months · 12 months
Poverty guideline table2026 HHS guidelines · 48 contiguous states and DCView table: the guideline and the limit for households of 1 to 8
Denials need a second signerOnOn · Off
Medicare Part D approvals need a second signerOnOn · Off
Missing-document requests go toWhoever can fix it — the patient for income, the office for signaturesWhoever can fix it · Always the office
Connections

Works with the packets a programme already receives

Fax, portal and mailprogramme applications per medicine, however they arrive
Prescriptionsthe prescription, diagnosis and prescriber details with NPI
Income proofpay stubs, tax returns, Schedule C, benefit and pension letters
Coverage proofinsurer appeal decisions, Medicare Part D plan letters, out-of-pocket statements
Programme rulesyour rules by version and the HHS poverty guideline table
Free-goods pharmacythe referral sent on signing, and the re-enrolment diary
What it changes

The difference, in numbers.

Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.

target
0.6days
median business days to a decision, against the 4.5-day industry standard
Standard4.5 business days
With agents0.6 days
target
100%
of decisions match when the facts match, compared every night
same facts, same decision
target
45days
of notice before an enrolment ends, the renewal pre-filled from last year

“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample programme data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (URAC industry standard for a new free-goods decision — 4.5 business days). Poverty guideline figures are the 2026 HHS guideline table as used in the working solution; HHS-OIG guidance on patient assistance programmes is cited for rules applied consistently. People, the programme, its medicines, insurers, offices and pharmacies named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.

Questions

What patient services teams ask us.

What is patient assistance program eligibility software?

Software that takes a free-medicine application from the packet that arrives by fax, portal or mail to a signed decision: residency, prescription, coverage path, household, income against the poverty guideline and signatures checked against the programme's rules. Patient Assistance Program Eligibility adds six agents that read the packet, walk it down the rules and cite each finding to its page, for a reviewer to decide and sign.

How does it calculate income against the federal poverty guideline?

The Income Calculator extracts every income figure, annualises it — weekly × 52, bi-weekly × 26, semi-monthly × 24, monthly × 12 — adds Schedule C net profit and every household source, and divides by the HHS guideline for the household size. The arithmetic is shown and recomputed, never rounded before the comparison, and the limit is a setting.

What happens when the application and the tax return disagree on the household?

The application is flagged for a person. Both counts are shown side by side with their pages and the share of the guideline each one gives. The programme rule counts the people living in the home today, as attested on the application; the reviewer records the count used and why.

Does it handle Medicare Part D and Medicaid?

Yes. The Coverage Checker decides the coverage path. Medicare Part D patients must have spent the programme's share of income on prescriptions this year, receive free medicine outside the Part D benefit and need two signers. A Medicaid card in the packet means the programme does not apply, and a prior-authorisation denial alone prompts a request for the appeal decision.

Does the prescriber or prescription volume affect the decision?

No. The prescriber, the office and the volume of prescriptions are never inputs. The 13 rules are applied the same way to every applicant, and a nightly check compares decisions with the same facts.

Do people stay in control of eligibility decisions?

Yes. The agents recommend and never decide; a reviewer signs every approval and denial, and denials and Medicare Part D approvals need a second signer. A missing signature or out-of-date proof becomes a request, never a denial.

Can we set our own programme rules?

Yes. The income limit, Medicare Part D spend, income proof window, enrolment length, poverty guideline table, second signers and who receives missing-document requests are settings. Rule changes need compliance approval and are versioned.

How long does it take to go live?

The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your programme rules, application forms, letter templates and a sample of past packets — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own applications first.

See it on
your applications.

We'll run Patient Assistance Program Eligibility on a sample of your own past application packets.