Four ways to recover denied claims. One pays only when it works.
In-house appeals, full RCM outsourcing, denial-prevention software, and agentic AI recovery — compared on who does the work, what it costs, and what it actually recovers.
| In-house | RCM outsourcing | Prevention software | Volari AI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who does the work | Your billing staff | Vendor (replaces your biller) | Your staff (operates a tool) | AI agents — done for you |
| What it costs | Staff time + opportunity cost | % of ALL collections (~4–9%) | License / subscription | 25% of recovered revenue only |
| What it recovers | Only what staff have time for | Part of a full-service scope | Prevents future denials (not past) | The written-off backlog you gave up on |
| Risk to you | High opportunity cost | Switching cost + lock-in | Upfront cost before any return | Zero — pay only on what we recover |
| Disruption | Pulls staff off other work | Rip-and-replace your billing | New tool to learn + operate | None — additive, no workflow change |
Common questions
Is it better to recover denied claims in-house or outsource?
In-house appeals are limited by staff time, so practices work the high-dollar claims and write off the rest. Outsourcing to a full-RCM vendor means replacing your biller and paying a percentage of all collections. Agentic AI recovery (Volari) is a third option: it works only the denied/written-off claims, done for you, paid only on what it recovers — additive to your existing team, not a replacement.
How is Volari different from AI denial-prevention software?
Prevention software flags denials before they happen but still leaves your staff to do the appeals, and it does nothing for the claims already written off. Volari's agents recover the past denials end-to-end — no tool for your team to operate.
What's the alternative to hiring another biller for appeals?
Hiring adds fixed cost for capacity you may not consistently need. Volari's agents provide elastic appeal capacity with no fixed cost — you pay 25% only on recovered claims, so it scales with results, not headcount.