Skip to content
Today's snapshot: 26,417 providers tracked
fonteum
ResearchToolsFonteumPricingCoverageMethodologyTrustAbout
DATA · MAY 8, 2026
Research › Provider Directory Accuracy Index › Methodology

Fonteum Research · Methodology Disclosure

Provider Directory Accuracy Index

Version: pdai/v1

DOI: Pending Zenodo deposit (§sprint3-zenodo-doi-pipeline)

Overview

The Provider Directory Accuracy Index (PDAI) measures the degree to which three federal provider data sources agree on four key fields for each individual NPI. A high agreement score indicates that the same provider's information is consistent across federal sources — a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for directory accuracy. A low score flags systematic data quality problems that can lead to ghost networks and No Surprises Act compliance risk.

Fonteum does not independently verify provider information. This is a cross-source agreement score — not a ground-truth accuracy measurement.

Data sources

CMS NPPES — National Plan and Provider Enumeration System

Self-reported provider data. The authoritative NPI registry. Providers are responsible for keeping their NPPES record current; update frequency varies by practice. Source tier: Tier-2 (federal public records, bulk download).

CMS Care Compare — Provider data

CMS-curated provider information published via the Care Compare portal. Reflects CMS enrollment records and curation workflows. Source tier: Tier-2 (federal public records).

CMS PECOS — Provider Enrollment, Chain, and Ownership System

Medicare enrollment data. Represents the billing and enrollment record that determines Medicare payment eligibility. Source tier: Tier-2 (federal public records).

Scored fields

FieldDefinitionNormalization
practice_addressPrimary practice city + stateLowercase; city normalized; state as 2-letter USPS code
primary_specialtyPrimary taxonomy code (NUCC 10-digit)Exact code match; no synonym expansion in v1
org_affiliationOrganizational CCN or parent NPI6-char CCN or 10-digit organizational NPI, uppercase
telecomPrimary phone number10-digit digits only, no formatting

Scoring algorithm (pdai/v1)

  1. NPI intersection: Include only NPIs present in ≥2 of the three sources. NPIs in only one source are excluded from scoring (no comparison possible).
  2. Pairwise field comparison: For each NPI, compare all source pairs (NPPES × Care Compare, NPPES × PECOS, Care Compare × PECOS when all three are present). Each pair contributes one comparison per field.
  3. Field agreement rate: Count comparisons where both sources have a non-null value and the values match exactly. Agreement rate = matches / comparisons.
  4. Coverage filter: Fields where fewer than 50% of matched NPIs have a non-null value in ≥2 sources are excluded from the composite score (insufficient coverage to be representative).
  5. Composite score: Simple average of field agreement rates for fields that pass the coverage filter.
  6. Insufficient sample: Scopes with fewer than 100 matched NPIs return no score and are flagged insufficient_sample = true.

Aggregation scopes

  • National: All matched NPIs across all states.
  • State: NPIs filtered by practice_address state component. A provider with a multi-state practice is included in each state where they have a matched record.
  • Specialty: NPIs filtered by primary_specialty NUCC taxonomy code.

Exclusions

  • NPIs present in only one source.
  • Organizational NPIs (Type-2 NPIs) — scored separately in a future methodology version; excluded from v1 to avoid mixing individual and group practices.
  • Scopes with fewer than 100 matched NPIs (insufficient sample).
  • Fields with null values in both sources (no comparison possible).

Version history

pdai/v1

Initial release. Four scored fields: practice_address, primary_specialty, org_affiliation, telecom. Simple average composite with 50% coverage filter. National + state + specialty scopes. Insufficient sample threshold: 100 NPIs.

Limitations

  • Agreement is a proxy for accuracy — fields that are wrong the same way in all sources score as accurate.
  • Address granularity is city + state only in v1; ZIP-level and street-level matching is deferred.
  • Specialty codes are matched exactly; taxonomy synonym expansion is not performed. Source-specific code mapping variations may inflate disagreement counts.
  • Snapshot timing differs across sources — NPPES, Care Compare, and PECOS have different update cadences. Field-level staleness is not currently accounted for.
  • Fonteum does not independently verify, inspect, or certify any provider. This index describes data consistency, not provider quality.
← Back to Provider Directory Accuracy Index

Compliance posture

We don’t sell ranking and don’t accept payment to move a provider up the list. For final hire decisions, verify licensing, insurance, and references directly with the applicable licensing or credentialing body.

No bulk-licensing source family is currently ingested for this vertical. Hire-time checking still routes through the body named above.

Methodology · Corrections log · Editorial policy

fonteum

Healthcare provider data, traced to source.


RESEARCH

  • Research hub
  • Data platform
  • For health-tech
  • Pricing
  • Press kit

NETWORK

  • Coverage
  • Healthcare graph

ABOUT

  • Mission
  • Methodology
  • Editorial policy
  • Corrections log
  • Security
  • SLA
  • Support
  • Refresh cadence
  • Terms
  • Contact

SUBSCRIBE

The monthly research digest. One email, first of each month. Unsubscribe anytime.


© 2026 FONTEUM RESEARCH · DATA SNAPSHOT MAY 8, 2026 · BUILT WITH CARE

  • X
  • LINKEDIN
  • PRESS