By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
Yes, reimbursement rates are negotiable with most commercial payers and many MCOs, though the degree of negotiating latitude varies. Medicaid fee schedules are typically set by state regulation and are less directly negotiable, though advocacy at the policy level can influence them. For commercial payers, initial offered rates are often starting points rather than final positions, particularly for organizations that can demonstrate strong clinical outcomes, accreditation, and market value. The key is approaching negotiations with adequate preparation — market data, cost analysis, and a clear value narrative — rather than simply requesting higher rates without substantiation.
Before entering negotiations, you need three categories of data: your cost of care delivery (wages, overhead, supervision, administration per billable hour), your current reimbursement rates by CPT code and by payer, and your outcome data demonstrating the clinical effectiveness of your services. A fourth useful category is market data — what peer practices in your geography are contracting at. Together, these data points allow you to make a specific, substantiated case for a rate increase rather than a general request. Payers respond to data, and practitioners who enter negotiations with organized, credible information are more likely to achieve favorable outcomes.
Accreditation from recognized bodies — such as BHCOE (Behavioral Health Center of Excellence) or CARF — signals to payers that your organization has met externally validated quality standards. This is relevant to payers because it reduces their utilization management burden and supports the case that your services are clinically effective and appropriately delivered. Some payers have accreditation requirements for network participation, so accreditation may be a prerequisite for certain contracts. In rate negotiations, accreditation status is one component of your value narrative — it is most powerful when combined with outcome data and billing accuracy records.
The CPT codes that typically generate the most revenue for ABA practices — and therefore deserve the most attention in rate negotiation — are 97153 (adaptive behavior treatment by protocol, technician-delivered), 97155 (adaptive behavior treatment with protocol modification, BCBA-delivered), and 97156 (family adaptive behavior treatment guidance). Rates for 97153 are particularly important because this code generates high volume; even modest per-unit rate increases produce significant revenue impact at scale. Rates for 97155 matter for BCBA sustainability, as this code reflects clinical supervision and direct treatment that require the highest-level credentials.
Market conditions are among the most powerful determinants of negotiating leverage. In markets with high demand for ABA services and limited provider supply, payers need your participation in their network more than you need their contract, creating genuine leverage for favorable rate terms. In saturated markets with many ABA providers, the leverage balance shifts toward payers. Geographic factors also matter: rural and underserved areas often have persistent provider shortages that create ongoing leverage for established practices. Understanding your market position objectively — not wishfully — is essential for calibrating your negotiation strategy and your willingness to walk away from contracts below your sustainability threshold.
The most common mistakes include: accepting initial offered rates without negotiating; entering negotiations without cost data or outcome data to support their position; negotiating with too junior a contact at the payer (rate decisions typically require director-level or above authorization); failing to negotiate rate escalators — annual increases built into multi-year contracts; and not knowing their walk-away position, which makes it impossible to negotiate credibly. A subtler mistake is framing the negotiation as a request rather than a business conversation between two parties with mutual interests. Payers benefit from having effective, reliable ABA providers in their network; effective negotiators make this mutuality explicit.
Reimbursement and clinical quality are more directly linked than most practitioners acknowledge. Adequate reimbursement enables appropriate staffing ratios, reasonable BCBA caseloads, time for non-billable supervision and program planning, and investment in staff training and development. Each of these factors directly affects clinical quality. A practice operating on thin margins must make tradeoffs that compromise one or more of these quality inputs. Viewing rate negotiation as a clinical quality activity — rather than as a purely financial one — reframes it as consistent with BACB ethical obligations and motivates the investment of time and resources it requires.
Billing accuracy is both an ethical requirement and a negotiating asset. Payers track billing patterns and flag providers with high denial rates, unusual billing profiles, or histories of audit findings. A clean billing record signals to payers that your organization is well-managed, compliant, and low-risk — factors that support both network participation and rate negotiations. Conversely, a history of billing irregularities undermines your credibility in rate conversations and may trigger increased utilization management scrutiny. Investing in billing compliance infrastructure — including regular internal audits and staff training — pays dividends in both regulatory protection and payer relationships.
Smaller practices can negotiate effectively, though their approach may differ from large organizations. Without the volume leverage of a large provider, smaller practices must compensate with clinical specialization, geographic necessity, and quality differentiation. A small practice that is the only ABA provider in a geographic area has substantial leverage regardless of size. Specialty expertise — in specific diagnostic populations, age groups, or service delivery models — also creates differentiation that supports negotiation. Additionally, joining group purchasing organizations or provider networks may allow smaller practices to negotiate collectively, accessing rates closer to what large organizations achieve through volume.
If a payer refuses to negotiate, the practice faces a decision about contract continuation. Before accepting a refusal as final, it is worth ensuring you have reached the right level of decision-maker — rate authority is typically not held by provider relations representatives but by network management or contracting directors. Persistence through appropriate escalation is not inappropriate. If rates genuinely cannot be increased, the practice must assess whether the contract is financially viable. If it is not, the ethical path is to plan an orderly exit — providing adequate notice, facilitating client transitions, and ensuring continuity of care — rather than continuing to operate at unsustainable rates or compromising clinical quality to reduce costs.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Negotiating ABA Reimbursement Rates — Becca Tagg · 0 BACB General CEUs · $0
Take This Course →BACB General CEUs · $0 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.