Topic cluster

EDI & EFT

4 focused guides in this cluster. Use the individual articles for the exact transaction rather than treating the entire payer/onboarding workflow as one status.

CMS-588 EFT routing decision between PECOS electronic signature and mailed form
01EDI & EFT

CMS-588 EFT Submission in 2026: PECOS Upload vs Paper Mail to the MAC

The CMS-588 can be handled through PECOS when the enrollment workflow supports electronic submission, or mailed to the Medicare contractor as a paper EFT form. The current CMS form also requires the correct authorized representative or delegated official and banking support.

READ GUIDE
Medicare EDI flow showing 837 claims outbound and 835 ERA inbound
02EDI & EFT

Medicare EDI Setup: 837 Claims, 835 ERA, Clearinghouses, and MAC Enrollment

Set up Medicare electronic claims and remittance as separate transaction paths: the 837 sends claims and the X12 835 carries electronic remittance advice. Enrollment mechanics vary by Medicare Administrative Contractor and submitter relationship, so document the MAC, clearinghouse or direct submitter, IDs, and return path.

READ GUIDE
CMS-588 signature verification for authorized and delegated officials
03EDI & EFT

CMS-588 Signature Rejection: Which Authorized or Delegated Official Must Sign

A CMS-588 can be rejected when the signature does not belong to an authorized or delegated official recognized for the enrollment. The paper form requires the correct signer, an original signature, and the signature date.

READ GUIDE
EDI routing comparison between a clearinghouse and direct submitter
04EDI & EFT

Clearinghouse vs Direct EDI Submitter: Which Medicare Connection Fits the Practice

A clearinghouse routes EDI transactions to multiple payers through one connection and can translate or validate payer-specific formats. A direct submitter uses its own submitter ID connection, which can be associated with the provider during EDI enrollment.

READ GUIDE