Follow the Money and Its Explanation
A bank deposit confirms receipt of funds. The electronic remittance advice explains how the payer processed claims and adjustments. The practice ledger records what was applied to individual accounts. These three records need to agree, but they do not serve the same purpose.
CMS describes reassociation as matching an electronic funds transfer to its related ERA. The matching trace number information in the EFT addenda and the X12 835 remittance supports that connection. Reassociation is an important starting point; it does not establish that every ledger entry has been reconciled.
Separate Matching From Posting
First determine which remittance belongs to the payment. Then examine how the payment, adjustments, and responsibility amounts were posted. A batch total can balance even when an item was applied to the wrong account or an unresolved amount was moved into an inappropriate category.
In an illustrative payment batch, most claim lines may post automatically while one provider level adjustment remains unresolved. Marking the entire batch complete because the deposit matches the remittance total conceals that remaining work. Keep the adjustment visible with its explanation and an owner who can determine the appropriate ledger treatment.
| Review layer | Question to answer |
|---|---|
| Funds received | Does the bank record match the expected payment? |
| Remittance matched | Which ERA explains this EFT? |
| Accounts posted | Were payments and adjustments applied to the correct accounts? |
| Exceptions resolved | What remains unmatched, unexplained, or pending review? |
Do Not Let Automation Hide an Exception
Automated posting can reduce repetitive entry, but its output needs an exception process. Define which items can post under established rules and which require review. Unmatched trace information, unexpected adjustments, duplicate files, or unresolved balances should remain identifiable.
The reviewer needs access to the original remittance and the resulting financial entries. A dashboard that shows only “posted” does not reveal whether the system applied an amount correctly. Preserve the connection between source information and ledger treatment so a discrepancy can be investigated without reconstructing the entire batch.
Make Month-End Review More Specific
A useful reconciliation report separates receipt differences, posting differences, and unresolved explanatory items. Assign each item a next step and distinguish work awaiting payer information from work awaiting an internal correction.
Leadership should be able to ask what portion of received money is fully explained in the ledger and what remains under review. That question is more informative than whether the bank deposit arrived.
Closing a payment queue should therefore mean that its defined checks are complete or its remaining exceptions have a documented path. The money and its explanation need to travel together.
Sources & Scope
Primary references checked October 4, 2026. Apply the guidance to the relevant program, service date, and practice circumstances.
Bring the Question to Your Workflow.
Discuss the issue this publication raises and the operating context behind it in your practice.