ComplaintsforFederation of State Medical Boards

• Initial Complaint

  04/24/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Unanswered

  More info

  I requested that the Federation of State Medical Boards profile state that my residency program and former employer, Centra Health, started on July 2022 and lasted until January 2023. The only unusual circumstances were that I was placed on administrative leave that disrupted my curriculum leading to subsequent termination. For one year Centra Health provided false information to the Federation of State Medical Boards about a *** plan that never occurred. I incurred charges in the form of 470$ twice from the Federation. Centra falsely reported failing to improve on a performance improvement plan twice that was never administered to me. I was in a motor vehicle accident and on leave studying for an exam. There were several residents in the program who had a performance improvement plan in prior years that was not reported to the ************** of ******** or to the Federation. In addition, the performance improvement plan during the time I was in the program, was also never implemented and did not restrict my clinical privileges as they did not exist. It was a non-disciplinary plan as I was in a training environment. The *** plan was made up by the residents instead of the attendings (my supervisors) and I left the institution within 12 hours of them constructing the plan. The program attempted twice to report inaccurate information to 50 state medical boards and destroy my reputation. This is discriminatory instead of disciplinary. This also prevents me from earning gainful employment and paying back my student loans. I later was diagnosed with cervical spondylosis which required physical therapy. Attached are two receipts from ****.

• Initial Complaint

  02/23/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Application date 02/25/2023 Transaction #2: Payment Reference Number: FCVS1754795 Transaction #1: Payment Reference Number: FCVS1737465 Case number: FID#: ********* I submitted an application as required for my workplace (******** Board of Medical Licensure). I was given vague instructions about the application through the **** (Federation Credentials Verification Service). A few weeks later, the application was "completed" but the **** did not get any of my information. Upon inquiring about this, apparently, when I submitted my application, I placed the designation as "self" instead of the "****". I was not aware of the error until I asked about it to the ****. They stated that I would have to pay the "repeat processing fee of ***** dollars despite my explanation of the error and the lack of my complicity in the error. To avoid delays in the application, I submitted the repeat application fee as well as additional fees required for the **** designation (undisputed amounts).I think the ***** application fee is redundant. I have no use for a "self" designation and I explicitly explained this to the staff. Additionally, it was extremely difficult to interact with them due to a complete lack of available customer ********************** representatives Paperwork of the situation described above is attached below.

  Business response

  04/03/2024

  Good afternoon,

  
  Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We are committed to providing exceptional customer ********************** and owning our part if our staff commits an error, or if there is a systematic error that impacts this service.  
  

  After researching this account and all phone and email logs and journal entries, we have determined no miscommunication was provided on our part. **************** contracted our services on 1/30/2023 initially, for a Self-Profile to provide him with source verified credentials of his medical and post graduate training.The online application process is very clear when selecting a designation type;the applicant may select three types of designations from a drop-down menu. The menu drop-down selections are: Select Designation Type: Medical Board, Self, or Institution in that order. A provider must be intentional in making this selection. Upon an initial or subsequent application, a provider may select multiple designations by selecting the add button and proceed with the same drop down for adding another Medical Board, Self, or Institution.
  

  According to our accounting records, **************** was charged for a new designation on 2/28/2023. Each State Medical Board (SMB) has their own requirements that must be met to release the profile to that board. These requirements vary from board to board and a self-profile would not meet a SMB requirement nor do they allow a provider to use a Self-Profile to submit to them as their credentials. These are only for a providers personal information and use.
  

  Prior to the ******** Submission, the provider was emailed instructions on how to submit his designation for ********. He did follow up inquiring if there was a way to avoid the additional fee. Within a few hours he added additional context stating he identified the problem stating *** his email, It appears that I only designated my profile to "self" instead of adding both "self" and "******** Board of Medical License". I think I may have to resubmit and designate the ****. Is this correct? If so, is it possible for me to pay the extra, outstanding, fees without having to repay for a subsequent investigation/application fee. In my initial application when I designated "self" I paid the $395 initial application fee.
  

  The subsequent fee was separate and apart from the initial application fee for the reason previously explained as we must meet each boards requirements, and this covers the audit of the file and any additions to the existing profile to meet that boards requirements. In addition to specific instructions given via phone and email, our instructions online and within the application are clear. Tens of thousands of providers complete this process annually without issue. Therefore,no refund would apply. This was communicated to **************** prior to his subsequent application.
  

  Regarding any difficulty interacting with our staff, we have a total of four email incidents and two phone calls from ****************. It is very easy to interact with us via phone, email, and live chat. Our average speed to answer an incoming phone call during business hours is eight seconds. Our response time to emails is less than 24 hours during business hours. The response time to Dr. ******* emails was less than seven business hours.
  

  We understand his frustration with his omitting ******** in the initial order. However, he still would have been assessed the subsequent processing fee had he ordered them at that same time. We do offer a discount to subsequent applications a difference of $34 if ordered together with the initial application.
  

  As a Not for ******************** we continuously work to control costs at every turn while providing a service that will bring value to physicians over the lifetime of their *********** of the ways we have accomplished this is to avoid annual dues to our physicians for the lifetime repository of their source verified credentials. After the initial application fee, we only charge a nominal fee for subsequent designations.
  

  Please let me know if you need further information or documentation to support our position.
  

  Sincerely,

  
  ****************************
  Manager of Customer Experience, FCVS/UA
  
  ********************
  *************************************************  |  ******, ** 76039
  o.************ | ********************* | www.fsmb.org

  Customer response

  04/03/2024

  Complaint: 21336704
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  In the complaint response:

  "We are committed to providing exceptional customer ********************** and owning our part if our staff commits an error, or if there is a systematic error that impacts this service.  "

  RESPONSE: This is blatantly untrue and is not respectful to the consumer. Exceptional customer ********************** that identifies and "owns up to" errors does not describe a company that ****. Regardless of non-profit status, this is not the point of contention. Exceptional customer ********************** is attempting to understand the faults of your corporation and employ means to fix these systemic errors

  "The online application process is very clear when selecting a designation type; the applicant may select three types of designations from a drop-down menu. The menu drop-down selections are: Select Designation Type: Medical Board, Self, or Institution in that order."

  RESPONSE: While the drop down menu portion is true, there was absolutely no clarification whatsoever regarding the different options. Whether intentional to set people up for errors like the one that I made, or unintentional, this is not at all clear. I believe that it is actionably vague.

  "Regarding any difficulty interacting with our staff, we have a total of four email incidents and two phone calls from ****************. It is very easy to interact with us via phone, email, and live chat. Our average speed to answer an incoming phone call during business hours is eight seconds"

  RESPONSE: This is yet another example of blatant false information. I much MUCH more than two times and each time was left transferred from representative to representative. Ultimately, I left MANY voicemails that went unreturned. These phone calls were to request clarification on the process. The failure to inform me of the steps, yet allowing payment extremely easily speaks to the dishonesty of this company.

  "We understand his frustration with his omitting ******** in the initial order. However, he still would have been assessed the subsequent processing fee had he ordered them at that same time. We do offer a discount to subsequent applications a difference of $34 if ordered together with the initial application."

  RESPONSE: A company that provides "exceptional customer **********************" would not just "understand frustration" but rather, would take action on remediating the errors and pitfalls on the part of the company. Also, "exceptional" customer ********************** would not attempt to put false blame by using intentionally accusatory language. The offer of the discount is irrelevant and does not apply to our discussion. The case in point is the **** was intentionally vague and lacks appropriate customer ********************** support and communication to help the consumers. I understand that ******** is a state where the use of the **** is mandatory for state licensure, but this does not, in any way, excuse the poor performance of the company.

   

  Lastly, "excellent" communication skills would not have led to this level of frustration on a consumer's behalf that they feel necessary to use the Better Business Bureau. I would like to highlight that I submitted this complaint to the BBB on February 23, 2024 and the BBB sent 3 email notifications of their lack of response before there was eventually a reply.

   

  
  Regards,
  
  *********************

  Business response

  04/03/2024

  Re: Response to Complaint ID ********
  Good afternoon,
  

  The Federation of State Medical Boards (****),through its Federation Credentials Verification Service (FCVS), provides physicians and physician assistants with a lifetime portfolio of primary-source verified credentials. The service is accepted by all state medical boards and has been used by more than ******* physicians and physician assistants. Accreditation from groups such as the ************************************* for ***************** (NCQA), and the Utilization ******************************* (URAC) demonstrate that the **** has the systems, processes, and personnel in place to thoroughly and accurately credentials and provide quality customer ********************** to its customers. The **** is committed to providing exceptional customer ********************** and owning our part if our staff commits an error, or if there is a systematic error that impacts this service. After researching this account and all phone and email logs and journal entries associated with *************************, we have determined that our customer support staff followed established procedures and standard and no miscommunication was provided on our part.
  

  The FCVS platform provide the ability for physicians to store, access, and transfer educational and professional credentials and records. The online application process to obtain a profile is very clear when selecting a designation type: the applicant may select three types of designations from a drop-down menu. The menu drop-down selections are: Select Designation Type: Medical Board, Self, or Institution in that order. Upon an initial or subsequent application, a provider may select multiple designations by selecting the add button and proceed with the same drop down for adding another Medical Board, Self, or Institution.
  

  A provider must be intentional in making this selection.
  

  **************** initially contracted our services on January 30, 2023 for a Self-Profile that would provide him  source verified credentials of his medical and post graduate training. Each state medical board (SMB) has their own requirements that must be met to release the profile to that board.These requirements vary from board to board, and a self-profile would not meet a SMB requirement, nor do they allow a provider to use a Self-Profile to submit to them as their credentials.  
  

  According to our accounting records, **************** was charged for a new designation on February 28, 2023, when he selected to transmit a profile to the ******** Board of Medical Licensure.
  

  Prior to the ******** Submission, **************** was emailed instructions on how to submit his designation for ********. He did follow up inquiring if there was a way to avoid the additional fee. Within a few hours he added additional context stating he identified the problem stating *** his email, It appears that I only designated my profile to "self" instead of adding both "self" and "******** Board of Medical License". I think I may have to resubmit and designate the ****. Is this correct? If so, is it possible for me to pay the extra, outstanding, fees without having to repay for a subsequent investigation/application fee. In my initial application when I designated "self" I paid the $395 initial application fee.
  

  The subsequent fee was separate and apart from the initial application fee for the reason previously explained as we must meet each boards requirements, and this covers the audit of the file and any additions to the existing profile to meet that boards requirements. In addition to specific instructions given via phone and email, our instructions online and within the application are clear.. This was communicated to **************** prior to his subsequent application.
  

  We understand his frustration with his omitting ******** in the initial order. However, he still would have been assessed the subsequent processing fee had he ordered them at that same time. We do offer a discount to subsequent applications a difference of $34 if ordered together with the initial application. As a Not for ******************** we continuously work to control costs at every turn while providing a service that will bring value to physicians over the lifetime of their *********** of the ways we have accomplished this is to avoid annual dues to our physicians for the lifetime repository of their source verified credentials. After the initial application fee, we only charge a nominal fee for subsequent designations.
  
  Regarding any difficulty interacting with our staff, we have a total of four email incidents and two phone calls from ****************. The **** maintains open communication with physicians and provides mechanisms for physicians to interact with customer support staff via phone, email, and live chat. Our average speed to answer an incoming phone call during business hours is eight seconds. Our response time to ****** is less than 24 hours during business hours. The response time to Dr.******* ****** was less than seven business hours.
  

  Please let me know if you need further information or documentation to support our position and conclusion that the complaint submitted to the BBB is without merit.
  

  Sincerely,

  ****************************
  Manager of Customer Experience, FCVS/UA
  
  ********************
  *************************************************  |  ******, ** 76039
  o.************ | ********************* | www.fsmb.org

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩